Backport

[Chan Chung Hang Christopher]

ABSDoug wrote:
> I don't understand backporting. Why isn't backporting enabled automaticly? ARE THERE risks with backporting? Thanks ahead of time.
> 


Most 'backports' could really just be a newer version of the software 
but these easy ones are never done for some reason. These are usually 
'consumers', that is, they provide nothing for other software to make 
use unlike 'providers' such as the kernel or software libraries.

However, sometimes a real backport is necessary. An example is the 
kernel. Sometimes, kernel interfaces change in newer versions and so 
fixes made in those newer kernels have to be backported to use the older 
interfaces in the version of the kernel that comes with a distribution. 
New versions of libraries adding new functions do not have to be a 
problem. It is only when a function have been removed or its behaviour 
changed or its dependencies changed that warrant a backport.