On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, andre999 wrote: > nicolas vigier a écrit : >> On Wed, 27 Jun 2012, andre999 wrote: >> >> >>>>> I would favour tagging backports as update repos, so that in the event >>>>> of a newer backport for security or bug fixes, that it will be >>>>> automatically presented with other updates. >>>>> >>>> No. >>>> as the update applet currently works it would show the backport as >>>> an update even if you dont have an earlier backport installed, >>>> defeating the purpose of having separate /updates vs /backports >>>> >>> This is conditional on first modifying the update tools, as suggested next. >>> A backport should only update an already installed backport. >>> (Similarly for nonfree and tainted, if that is not already the case.) >>> >> We should not change the behaviour of medias tagged as update repo. If >> we want a different behaviour for backports then we should tag those >> medias as backport, not update. >> > > The idea is, once the tools are appropriately adjusted, to tag the backport > repos as update media, as in rpmdrake. But alternately we could get the > update tools to automatically treat backport repos as update media for > backports.
backports are not updates, why should we tag them as update ?
