Am 04. Nov, 2003 schw=E4tzte Derek Neighbors so:
> Why are using the -t option? I ask because using it to install packages
> other than the version you are running is EXTREMELY risky to the stabilit=
y
> of your system.
I disagree. I have found -t to be quite a nice compromise between stable
and the things you need out of testing or unstable.
> I see a lot of people that complain about Debian (not saying you were
> complaining) that are doing things that are considered big no no's or
> buyer beware.
Or in this case, something I recommended :).
> My two cents.
I'll see your two cents and raise you 3 Pfennig :).
> If you want a rock solid system and don't need up to the minute versions
> of all things just major packages. Use STABLE. Then use back ports from
> apt-get.org to run current packages of bigger projects (gnome, mozilla,
> openoffice, etc).
Not a bad option. We need a better interface to the unofficial sources. We
also need to add a way to get some quality control on them.
> If you want the latest greatest of everything. Run UNSTABLE. Make sure
> you have apt-listbugs installed. This program will notify you any time
> you update if programs you are updating have critical or higher bugs file=
d
> against them, thus helping you avoid upgrading at in opportune times.
I say this is a job for testing. Unstable is only for people who want to
have the latest and greatest bugs, IMHO.
> If you want to help in the release of the next stable version of Debian
> use testing and file lots of bug reports. Note: I can't consciencously
> recommend testing for daily use other than to help Debian release cycle.
It works great for me on multiple boxen.
The real fix is to come up with a stable, yet somewhat current distro for
debian. I'm working on it :).
ciao,
der.hans
--=20
# https://www.LuftHans.com/ http://www.AZOTO.org/
# Science is magic explained. - der.hans
(text/plain)