Re: Incoming
On Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 08:49:17PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 09:46:13AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 01:22:12PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > > debian 'unstable' is perfectly usable for production servers, using
> > > it for such does not require any more caution about upgrades than
> > > using debian 'stable' or debian 'frozen'.
> >
> > Like during the Perl transition period, or when a recent libstdc++
> > broke apt, or when su stopped being able to su, or when ....
> >
> > Need I continue?
>
> i repeat: "[using unstable] does not require any more caution about
> upgrades than [using stable]"
>
> upgrading to whatever the latest stable releases is requires just
> as much caution/paranoia as upgrading to whatever is in the latest
> unstable. anyone who trusts the latest debian stable release on their
> critical/production servers without testing it on other machines first
> deserves whatever they get.
>
> if you have a clue and you are cautious then both stable and unstable
> are safe.
>
> if you don't have a clue or you are not cautious, then neither are.
If you are so careful and clueful, why do you need instant access to an
incoming mirror?
--
-----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
/ Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \
` bcollins@debian.org -- bcollins@openldap.org -- bmc@visi.net '
`---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
Reply to: