Re: When Debian 4.1 will arrive... will anyone care?
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 12:52:34PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-04-20 at 19:43 +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > 1. why is this allegedly a 'benefit'? what's so special about
> > libraries?
> > why is a new libc6 or libssl etc more scary than a new apache or php
> > etc?
>
> When using a backports package, the breakage is confined to that
> package. When pulling in newer libs aswell, it might be that some
> totally unrelated part of the system, e.g. another service on that host,
> breaks because of a change of behaviour in that library that is not
> triggered by the application for which I upgraded it.
all very good in theory.
the trouble with theory is that in theory, theory and practice are the
same...but in practice, they're not. practice trumps theory every time,
because it's what actually happens rather than what someone thinks might
happen.
> It's a matter of reducing risk: if code works, do not change it unless
> necessary. If I can upgrade one application and keep other existing code
> in place, I prefer that of changing it just for the heck of it.
then stick with stable.
or use backports + testing or unstable or even backports. just don't
delude yourself (or WORSE, others) that you're still running a 'stable'
system because you're not.
i really don't care what you or anyone else uses. it's your machine,
do what you like on it. it just annoys me to see self-delusion being
promoted as fact.
craig
--
craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
The difference between a misfortune and a calamity? If Gladstone fell into
the Thames, it would be a misfortune. But if someone dragged him out again,
it would be a calamity.
-- Benjamin Disraeli
Reply to: