Re: "testing" improvements
En réponse à Andreas Metzler <ametzler@downhill.at.eu.org>:
> > This means that you are using unstable packages and you'll possibly
> > have serious problems with some packages (even more with bloats like
> > GNOME of KDE). So stable is not stable anymore.
>
> Hello,
> GNOME's or KDE's bugs are usually selfcontained, ie. if konqueror is
> buggy you won't get a bugreport against libpcre.
>
> You'll have even more serious problems if you try to use woody on a
> more or less recent laptop, you'll _need_ Kernel 2.4.20 and XFree86
> 4.2.1 to run the system properly.
This is problem is else than requiring the bleeding edge GNOME 2.2
and KDE 3.1.
> > How can developers reproduce bugs on unstable/stable mixed systems?
> [...]
>
> These are no unstable/stable mixed systems (that would be what you
> get by adding sid to sources list and using apt-pinning).
>
> And $developer will know these are unofficial backports by simply
> taking a look the version-string. These are _proper_ backports with
> decreased version number with an identifier (woody, bunk, ...) in it!
Sure they are mixed systems. Backporting an unstable package
to stable doesn't make it stable. Those backports not even come
from testing.
I'd prefer to see testing updated more often when possible (as I
said on architectures that make it possible to be updated) so
that people use testing instead of backported unstable.
--
Jérôme Marant <jerome@marant.org>
<jerome.marant@free.fr>
http://marant.org
Reply to: