Re: linux-image backports metapackage

Am So., 2. Juni 2024 um 01:44 Uhr schrieb Thomas Ward <
[email protected]>:

> I’m just going to comment on this bit here because I’m on the Ubuntu side
> of things with a number of hats INCLUDING Ubuntu Backporters.
>
>
>
>    - I think (not sure anymore) Ubuntu-backports uses a meta-package like
>    linux-image-amd64-bookworm-backports.
>
>
>
> No, this is incorrect.  You may be thinking specifically of cases where
> later kernels are made available to the LTS releases as individual updates
> during the point releases of LTS for Hardware Enablement – in those cases
> we have `linux-image-generic-hwe` metapackage with updated kernels
> available, but those are not considered “backports” in the same way Debian
> Backports would be.
>
>
>
> In fact, the Ubuntu Backporters team ***explicitly forbids*** backporting
> of the kernel or associated packages as you can see per our “special case”
> and “forbidden packages” patterns here [1].  The HWE kernels in Ubuntu are
> specially handled, and not ‘backports’ in the sense that it’d have the
> Backporters groups touching it.  And that’s ONLY for the LTS in Ubuntu.
>
>
>
> So no, your statement that Ubuntu does this as backports is not correct.
> It’s done by the Kernel team, and only for LTSes to enable later hardware
> enablement, it is NOT just a “separate chain” of packages or Linux
> dependencies.
>
>
>
> Sure, you can install numerous kernels yourself.  You can even install
> separate kernel packages or compile your own.  It doesn’t mean these’re
> actually “backports” nor something that should be considered for regular
> backporting, etc. because even in Ubuntu the ‘backported’ kernels are
> heavily tested and ‘special case’ for the LTS release (which is different
> than Debian).
>
>
>
> [1]: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBackports#Forbidden_packages
>
>
>
>
>
> Thomas
>
> Ubuntu Developer
>
> Ubuntu Backporter
>

Hello Thomas,

Thank you for this clarification and explanation. I really misremembered
this.


>
>
> *From:* Johan Kröckel <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Saturday, June 1, 2024 07:34
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* linux-image backports metapackage
>
>
>
> Hello everybody,
>
>
>
> I think I asked this before but I'd like to have both the current stable
> and backports kernels installed.
>
>
>
> When I upgrade linux-image-amd64 to the backports version the stable
> kernel is not upgraded anymore. When I just install the current backports
> package directly, like linux-image-6.7.12+bpo-amd64, it stays at that
> version.
>
>
>
> I think (not sure anymore) Ubuntu-backports uses a meta-package
> like linux-image-amd64-bookworm-backports.
>
>
>
> Wouldn't this be a solution or why would that be a bad/unfeasible idea?
>
>
>
> Thank you
>
>
>
> Johan
>