From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from server19320154104.serverpool.info ([193.201.54.104]:35189 "EHLO hauke-m.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751246Ab3HAUUL (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Aug 2013 16:20:11 -0400 Message-ID: <51FAC2EF.8080402@hauke-m.de> (sfid-20130801_222014_043575_A7EF835B) Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 22:19:59 +0200 From: Hauke Mehrtens MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" CC: Chris R , "backports@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Bug with the website: links are broken References: <000d01ce8e07$80a36430$81ea2c90$@gmail.com> <007b01ce8eee$cca32e50$65e98af0$@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: backports-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 08/01/2013 09:43 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Chris R wrote: >>> Its back up... >> >> Thanks very much! >> >>> ...that page has ancient releases, why are you still using them? >> >> I'm stuck at kernel version 2.6.37. > > So backports is designed so that you use a backports-3.11 say on > 2.6.37. That is you don't have to use a backport-3.10 only on 3.10 in > fact that'd be pointless. We backport functionality from a kernel as a > base and that base is used as the version name for the release. > > A few folks have reported misunderstanding this as well so I'm curious > apart from the documentation we have on the wiki [0] what else can we > do to help with this? > > [0] https://backports.wiki.kernel.org > > Luis Users do not read any documentation. ;-) I added it to multiple places in the wiki and still there are people in the IRC with such problems. We should make it fail if kernel version > backports version and we should also take the minor version into account. If the major version is the same we should print a big warning. Hauke