Re: OT: testing vs. unstable for new laptop installation
Whether you decide to use testing or unestable, my suggestion is to install
"apt-listbugs". This way you're informed of serius bugs in packages to be
upgraded. And then apt will ask you if you realy want to upgrade the buggy
package or not.
On Wednesday 13 August 2003 15:18, John R. Ackermann N8UR wrote:
> I know this is a bit off-topic, but hope I can gather some opinions here.
> I'm about to install Debian on a new laptop that's going to be my primary
> personal machine. I'm trying to figure out whether I'm better off putting
> on testing or unstable (I use KDE, and stable still has the ancient version
> 2; it's not in consideration here).
>
> I know the relative advantages/disadvantages on a general basis (i.e., slow
> security updates to testing), so what I'm really looking for is a view on
> the current state of the distros -- is unstable solid enough to install and
> use on a daily basis? Is testing already getting behind in versions?
>
> My main apps are KDE and OpenOffice; they need to work well. I use Phoenix
> (or whatever it's called this week) as my primary browser, and I use the
> non-open-source, but nonetheless excellent, Mulberry for IMAP email (just
> downloaded their new version 3, which apart from requiring a new
> registration fee has a totally different screen layout); still trying to
> decide whether I like it or not).
>
> Thanks for any thoughts on this...
>
> John
> jra@febo.com
Reply to: