[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: how about a real unstable?

On Tue, Mar 28, 2000 at 01:48:01PM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> > This is what experimental is for, no?
> > Unstable is for unstable Debian, not necessarily unstable software. The
> > experimental distribution is much more appropriate for unstable upstream
> > software.

experimental is for *really* unstable software. Software that's actually
likely to wreck your system to the point you'll need to actually use
those backup things everyone regularly makes.

The new XFree probably fits here, since for a lot of people wrecking X
is more than enough to wreck their system, subjectively. Things like
netfilter or kernel-2.3.99, probably aren't, since at worst you can
just setup lilo (or whatever) to boot back to your old kernel, and keep
using all your old tools. Whether people have the time and inclination
to package these things, though, is another matter.

> agreed with the addition that experimental must also be apt'able.  

Erm, it is though.

deb http://some.debian.mirror/debian project/experimental/

IIRC, it's even setup so that if you add that to your sources.list,
apt-get dist-upgrade *won't* automatically choose packages from there
when you tell it to do an apt-get dist-upgrade; it'll only use it for
packages you specifically select with apt-get install.


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG encrypted mail preferred.

 ``The thing is: trying to be too generic is EVIL. It's stupid, it 
        results in slower code, and it results in more bugs.''
                                        -- Linus Torvalds

Attachment: pgp0T05mv5vs2.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: