Re: debian unstable, stable enough?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 10 September 2006 14:57, Marc Wilson <msw@cox.net> was heard
to say:
> I will always maintain that people should be discouraged from using
> unstable.
Once I had installed and run Stable (upgrading from pre-Buzz through
Hamm), I was interested in learning more about how things worked.
When I finally had two systems instead of one, I left the first with
Stable and used Unstable.
Fixing the occasional glitch has taught me a great deal about how
Linux systems and Debian work. I would not have learned so much
without these periods of "system administration".
So folks who are not interested in learning more than they do about
their systems are best served running Stable only. Or not Debian at
all, but Linspire, Mepis, Ubuntu or one of the other pre-selected
kinds of distributions.
But for anyone who wants to learn, I actively encourage them to first
install Stable, see how to get it working as they like it, then
upgrade to Unstable and "see the elephant".
I have avoided the sysvinit problem by not having turned off my
desktop for the last two weeks. I am not enthusiastic about what
might happen, so I guess it's time for a full system backup! This is
what running Unstable means, _learning_.
Curt-
- --
September 11th, 2001
The proudest day for gun control and central
planning advocates in American history
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iQEVAwUBRQRrHC9Y35yItIgBAQKUxwf9Fnd9z3QG09p/C4jeK+AN6qhmthj92Ltb
tjsaOnORbBnhtHqbzPsbdZGqFBaNM9UgOvs4ji7dKcrk9GBTNzbG8smyyZ1KQOF9
E3biLbheV++NuulHICH8bAx1SsmXE12tp2TnWNVz4h36mhyj81QV1ov5GEyTJZZ2
iyANbN1xV4QPMJlaDfOS2noVAftp+TKHgp4aQ45266yf+atX5cgLzG9w6r0eLwKd
q+zLicg10wUK31ZqygbrKjPi+N+enayxXEuRJC0aYHwlK3F/O/gYz5IZqnGrZJdp
kJWSOuhfmV0kKKIAuxhHy1UzRHcpfbsqWHGlncqX4KrJy2ZBLjgBKw==
=JQNm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: