Re: stable vs testing
This brings up a question I have. Isn't testing technically the *last*
of stable/testing/unstable to get security fixes?
security fixes for stable are packported immediately, and the fixes are
also incorporated into unstable asap. Now for testing, there would be
at least a delay of a week for it to pass through unstable correct?
This is annoying, because testing is acutally in most cases in a
pretty stable state, and would be good for many production environments
except for the fact that security fixes take the longest to get
incorporated.
Can anyone verify this?
On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 11:37:08PM +1100, Glenn Hocking wrote:
> Hi All
>
> I have a need for glibc2.2 so I may have to use the testing/unstable
> distribution. This will be in a ISP environment but not as a public
> host.
>
> My question is what other experiences have others have running
> testing/unstable in a live environment with regards to both security and
> stability.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Kind regards
> Glenn Hocking
>
>
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
--
Nick Jennings
Reply to: