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

Re: 'unstable' (was Re: potato late, goals for woody (IMHO))

Bernard ISAMBERT <isambert@sib.fr> writes:

> But, as everyone can easily experience it,
> if you regularly update your system with the unstable distro,
> you have a system which really crashes, or fails on important
> packages, here or there now or then.
> I'm not natively english speaking, but for me that's the definition
> of un *unstable* system.
> So, please, call it unstable. It's the best word.
I wonder what you mean by 'system crash'. I think that packages or
programs that are buggy may crash, but not the 'system' (unless the
package concerned is the kernel ;-), or XFree in some cases). I
'assign' my crashes mostly to my 2.3.99 kernel and XFree4.0 (wich I
must admit to have installed from the binary tarballs 'over' the
existing installation handled by dpkg, which is certainly not optimal

So I'm not quite sure if unstable is the right word. (And yes, I do
regular updates, almost daily...)

Andreas Rottmann (Dru@ICQ, 54523380@ICQ)
Pfeilgasse 4-6/725, A-1080 Wien, Austria, Europe
[one of 78,35% Austrians who didn´t vote for Haider!]

Reply to: