[
Date Prev
][
Date Next
] [
Thread Prev
][
Thread Next
] [
Date Index
] [
Thread Index
]
Re: How "unstable" is unstable?
To
: Brian McGroarty <
brian@mcgroarty.net
>
Cc
: Neal Lippman <
nl@lippman.org
>, Debian-User <
debian-user@lists.debian.org
>
Subject
: Re: How "unstable" is unstable?
From
: Ismael Valladolid Torres <
ismael@sambara.org
>
Date
: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 21:44:01 +0200
Message-id
: <
[🔎]
3F11B681.4020909@sambara.org
>
In-reply-to
: <
[🔎]
20030713035026.GA29282@mcgroarty.net
>
References
: <
[🔎]
1057540063.28168.1.camel@gandalf
> <
[🔎]
20030713035026.GA29282@mcgroarty.net
>
Brian McGroarty wrote:
sid is pretty stable for most people.
It is pretty usable, however take care of problematic combinations of
platform/day of week when upgrading from a fresh woody install. Avoid
PPC/Saturday, if posible. :P
Regards, Ismael
Reply to:
debian-user@lists.debian.org
Ismael Valladolid Torres (on-list)
Ismael Valladolid Torres (off-list)
References
:
How "unstable" is unstable?
From:
Neal Lippman <nl@lippman.org>
Re: How "unstable" is unstable?
From:
Brian McGroarty <brian@mcgroarty.net>
Prev by Date:
Re: USB CD-RW for linux
Next by Date:
Re: 2.5 series kernel experiences
Previous by thread:
Re: How "unstable" is unstable?
Next by thread:
New IDE drive dramatically slow system?
Index(es):
Date
Thread