Re: Dangers of "stable" in sources.list
On 5/3/07, Joey Hess <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Martin Marcher <email@example.com> [2007.05.03.1434 +0200]:
> > Exactly my opinion too, i was more interested in hearing why I would
> > wan't stable instead of the hardcoded name. I just can't think of any
> > reason to do that and practically have really use for it (except for
> > the testing or unstable distribution as I pointed out initially)
> I agree. I suggest you file a bug against debian-installer.
I suggest that people try a current version of debian-installer before
fuling bugs on it.
well it seems I broke something off here :)
I should have specified a little clearer. I'm mainly refering to the
servers I maintain. On my notebook i run osx for browsing and
multimedia stuff and debian testing when i need to get things done.
I tend to set up my servers so that they are somewhat "self
maintaining" e.g. informing me about packages that could need updating
strange events yadda yadda the usual stuff. And personally do use the
codenames everywhere (except for testing on my notebook as I never had
problems and it was a smooth transition at all times)
But since I saw quite a few posts where the problems where exactly
having stable in sources.list and thus relying on the long release
cycles of debian caused these problems i'm trying to make something up
so that stable in my sources.list could be an advantage.
Maybe something like when /etc/debian_version changes from 3.1 to 4.0
let all the bells ring and alert a few people that there is some work
to be done. Then again I guess the file won't change without actually
updating so this is an chicken egg problem.
As for the installer, I can't really remember wether by default stable
or the codename is put into sources.list - but putting stable in there
a) very well a bug
b) absolutely not a but
a) because with all the hype about linux that comes up with new
releases of major distros newbies will be disappointed for sure if
they update after a week and break their system despite it's stable
and b) yes people should read documentation but we aren't in a perfect
world, which brings us back to a)