Re: linux backport in jessie LTS

On Tue, 2018-04-24 at 15:44 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Sun, 22 Apr 2018, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > Therefore, would it make sense to add a Linux 4.9 backport to the > > regular jessie and jessie-security suites? > > Yes, I think so. It's also interesting to keep a security-supported >

Re: linux backport in jessie LTS

On Sun, 22 Apr 2018, Ben Hutchings wrote: > Therefore, would it make sense to add a Linux 4.9 backport to the > regular jessie and jessie-security suites? Yes, I think so. It's also interesting to keep a security-supported kernel once we are past the usual 5 years of LTS (aka Extended LTS). Since

Re: linux backport in jessie LTS

On 04/22/2018 05:54 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote: > The backports team decided in 2016 that backports suites will no longer > be updated once the corresponding stable suite enters LTS. This > implies that jessie-backports will be closed at the end of May. > > It is clear that a fair number of wheezy

Re: linux backport in jessie LTS

* Ben Hutchings [20180422 17:55]: > Are there users currently > running jessie with Linux 4.9 and expecting to continue doing so > through the LTS period? Yes! Not as many as we had wheezy systems with a backports Kernel when we realized that there are no further updates,

linux backport in jessie LTS

The backports team decided in 2016 that backports suites will no longer be updated once the corresponding stable suite enters LTS. This implies that jessie-backports will be closed at the end of May. It is clear that a fair number of wheezy LTS users relied on backported kernel versions and were