On Tue, 22 Mar 2016, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: Hi, > On mar., 2016-03-22 at 11:57 +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote: > > On Tue, 22 Mar 2016, Julien Cristau wrote: > > > It won't be in testing if it's not suitable for stable. That would > > > defeat the purpose of testing. > > Then it defeats the purpose of backports too. > > I have the feeling that won't lead us nowhere. Considering PPA (or PPA-like) > is non-existent right now, I'm a bit lost on how to provide linux-grsec to > interested stable users (I don't really think adding a sid source, even with > pinning, is really nice for those users). > > Would stable-updates, with its faster update rhythm, something possible? > Besides that, I'm a bit out of ideas. I thought about it during lunch. Since grsec enabled kernels are pretty standalone and should not break (a lot of things), I can live with the following proposal: You - or better more than one person - promise to support this kernel for at least stable and (later) oldstable. Preferably later jessie-lts. Supporting means the usual thing frequent uploads and so on. Is that something you can live with? Alex
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature