Re: Non-security updates between stable releases?
Tim, I couldn't write it better.
3 months ago, there has been a thread with similar topics: Debian
Tim Hull wrote / napísal(a):
Just to follow up, I do appreciate that Debian wishes to cover so many
architectures - I even installed Debian on quite possibly the most
obscure architecture in the past, m68k (an old Quadra 700). Would have
been funny to attempt a full-blown X install. Honestly, only NetBSD
rivals Debian in that department. However, I will agree that it seems a
bit absurd to hold up security fixes for a browser for all architectures
based on breakage on a few obscure ones.
Getting back to my original question, it still seems like there is a
problem (at least for end users on the desktop) with the current release
cycle. Lenny is not slated for release until September 2008, yet Etch
will be spectacularly outdated before then (for some, it already is -
just ask Gnome users, who are two releases behind *now*). Testing is
not a viable desktop choice (observe the aforementioned security
issues), and unstable is really OK only if you are a Linux expert. It
seems to me that something has to be done - whether this be some
official backports (especially of popular components like KDE, Gnome,
the kernel, etc) or a faster release cycle. Personally, I prefer the
former idea - I don't see a need to update my glibc and gcc every 6
months and like the stable Debian base, though I do like to have the
latest Gnome. I think many users are in the same boat.
Anyway, if any work is done in this regard, please let me know.
Odchádzajúca správa neobsahuje vírusy, nepoužívam Windows.
Mgr. Peter Tuhársky
Mesto Banská Bystrica
975 39 Banská Bystrica
Tel: +421 48 4330 118
Fax: +421 48 411 3575