Re: getting rid of "testing"
On Tue, 2019-06-25 at 16:39 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 2:08 PM Ansgar wrote:
> > what do people think about getting rid of current suite names ("stable",
> > "testing", "unstable") for most purposes? We already recommend using
> > codenames instead as those don't change their meaning when a new release
> > happens.
>
> I use these (testing, etc) so getting rid of them would be annoying.
The "stable" suite names are more annoying than
unstable/testing/experimental as they require updates to suites at
release time that are not related to the release. That shouldn't be
necessary.
For "testing", "unstable" one could probably introduce some `Alias`
field in Release, but I also like minimalist solutions (which already
seem to work well for Ubuntu).
> > Related to that I would like to be able to write something like
> >
> > deb http://deb.debian.org/debian debian11 main
>
> Already kind of possible:
>
> deb http://deb.debian.org/debian Debian9.9 main
Yes, but it gives warnings for issues that I believe should be an error
instead. (And currently a good reason for TLS to talk to mirros so a
MitM that is not a mirror operator cannot give you oldstable when you
want to use unstable.)
debootstrap gives an error for this:
+---
| $ /sbin/debootstrap --print-debs Debian9.9 . http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian unstable
| [...]
| E: Asked to install suite Debian9.9, but got stable (codename: stretch) from mirror
+---
As Adam already pointed out having the point release in there also
makes "Debian9.9" rather unhelpful.
> > Ubuntu already has no suite names, only codenames, but having to map
> > "Ubuntu 18.04" to "bionic" instead of just writing the version in
> > sources.list is annoying (I always have to look up the codename to be
> > sure as I don't use Ubuntu that much).
>
> They do have the 'devel' suite, but it is not a proper one:
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1821272
That is what Debian9.9 (and similar) are currently as well.
Ansgar
Reply to: