Re: libstdc++... Help please
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 12:45:32PM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > > sid=unstable - you know that, don't you?
> > We need someone to test unstable, don't we? We can not realistically
> > test our distribution if the only people running it are those with many
> > computers who put it on one they aren't really using. Please don't give
> > our testers crap for actually testing the system in real life
> > situations.
> Nope. We need ourselves to play with unstable - but unstable is not up
> for testing. That's what *testing* is for! :-)
Testing in almost all cases is worse than unstable. Two major reasons,
it doesn't get security updates at all, and two you don't even know what
bugs are in it since they get closed when the bug is fixed in unstable.
The fact that things rarely migrate from unstable into testing due to
the fact that forward and reverse dependencies must be met only
compounds the problem.