Re: 9.0 is getting old...

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

David Brownlee <abs%absd.org@localhost> writes:

> Some options
> 1) For at least amd64 we could build 9.0 and 9.2 packages, so 9.0 and
> 9.1 have the "best available" likewise 9.2
> 2) Orphan 9.0 and 9.1 binary package dirs and just keep updating 9.2 +
> 3) Build on 9.2 and provide a minimal patchkit tar for the missing
> files on 9.0/9.1
> 4) Build on 9.2 and just tell people on 9.0 & 9.1 they must update
>
> I'd be inclined towards 2). but 4) suggests something I'll open in a
> different thread.

Before we debate options, what is the reality?

If someone builds packages on 9.2 and installs them on 9.0, are there
actual problems?