Re: Keeping more up to date than Lenny, safely?
> On 10/06/08 11:40, Dr. Jennifer Nussbaum wrote:
>> Hi. Im running Lenny on two computers, and have been very happy
> with it. Nothings ever really been broken, so i dont think that a
>> version is necessary for what i need.
>> I dont really want to go "unstable"--the name alone scares
Do "testing" and pull in gcc and the build tool chain from "unstable".
You may want to use an unstable kernel from time to time, so pull a new
one (and the dependencies) in from unstable after it goes through at
least two point revisions.
Don't run a heavily mixed testing+unstable system, (you can seriously
break your system) but one or two items from unstable usually doesn't
cause much trouble. If the one you want won't install due dependency
problems, then be patient and it will float up to testing in due course,
either back-ported or with the dependencies moving to testing as well.
(and get to know www.backports.org)
That is really the main thing I fear doing this: the chance of breaking
the dependency graph and having to de-install the package by hand.
Fixing the Debian apt/dpkg database afterward may not be trivial,
although $apt-get -f install helps some of the time.
Ron Johnson wrote:
>> but at the same time i read the release notes for the new
> > Ubuntu beta, and its really nice. I *want* Gnome 2.24 (the auto
> Unstable is at GNOME v2.22.5
Unstable (or Sid) has been at 2.23 for a short while, and is already
transitioning to 2.24.
> > XRandR thing is especially nice, ive always wanted multi-head
> > but am skeered to mess with my xorg.conf). I _want_ the new
>> version of Network Manager. Etcetera.
>> Is there any way to get this, but without the risk of the system
> > breaking every other day?
Uh, no. Well, Sidux. Or an Ubuntu beta.
>> I dont want my life to be about managing
>> the system,
Then you should probably run stable.
>> but im willing to have a little inconvenience in
>> return for more up to date features.
Testing, after the release of lenny.