Re: Debian home page -> Download link broken:
Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2023 at 08:12:49AM -0400, The Wanderer wrote:
>> The same thing applies to those who track 'stable' by that name. Using
>> the symbolic names for the releases, rather than the actual codenames,
>> *is semantically different* and the tools *should treat it differently*.
>
> Using "stable" in your sources.list is idiotic, and you should not do
> it. Ever.
i understand where you are coming from, but obviously i
don't agree as i've been doing it for many years.
> This is not a "use at your own risk" scenario, like using "testing".
> That's OK for people who choose to accept the responsibility.
>
> Using "stable" is just a mistake.
>
> If you're suggesting that the behavior of the tools should change in
> some way -- something I am *not* advocating -- then the bext change
> would be to make them *reject* any sources.list line that uses "stable".
> Inform the user that the use of that label is too dangerous, and that
> they must select a specific release to track.
no. that's breaking things that work fine for some
people.
if you keep your installation very simple there is a good
chance you can do upgrades without too much fuss or bother.
i just recently upgraded my stable partition and it was
done without reading the release notes at all. i did have to
change some lines in the apt sources list, but otherwise it
all went as i would expect for it to go.
on thing i do out of habit is only upgrade certain things
first (apt, dpkg, core stuff) before i let the rest of the
packages go in. sometimes i have to run through a few times
but apt-get figures it out eventually or i have to use some
flags to get broken packages fixed.
my normal system runs about 2500 packages total and i
don't do too many complcated things. my stable partition
has many fewer packages and i don't do some things on it
at all (if i add some package for testing i often remember
to remove it and the dependencies so i'm not bloating it).
songbird
Reply to: