Re: Some observations regardig the progress towards Debian 3.1
* Yann Dirson wrote:
> Norbert Tretkowski <tretkowski@inittab.de> writes:
> > * Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >> - testing, unstable or Debian 3.0 with backports aren't suitable for
> >> production systems
> >
> > Of course it is, Debian 3.0 with a few _selected_ backports works
> > nice, also on production systems.
>
> As a user of several backports (namely kde3 and OOo), I must confirm
> Adrian's stance. The lastest example I stumbled upon is that if you
> install kdebase-dev (or even qt3-dev) from the backport, you can't
> install libgtk2.0-dev from woody, because both depend on different
> libpng*-dev which are in conflict with each other.
I think you haven't seen the "selected" in my sentence. I wasn't
talking about hundreds of backports. I was talking about "a few
selected" backports, e.g. quagga on a route server or postfix on a
mail server.
> So with this backport, I must choose between being able to build qt or
> gtk apps, but not both. Nice, eh?
That's why mixing different backport repositories is not a good idea.
--
- nobse
Reply to: