Le Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 09:49:20AM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit : > Greg McPherran <gm@mcpherranweb.com> writes: > > I am considering using unstable, and would be happy to provide feedback > > on any findings. If someone could point me to the best contact for such > > feedback, so that I may be helpful, I would be grateful. > (…) > I would recommend testing over unstable unless you're very familiar with > Linux and comfortable with your ability to roll back to previous kernels, > downgrade and pin packages, and fix weird problems. Unstable doesn't break > that often, but it is prone to more low-level breakage than testing is. And I would recommend unstable over testing, for security reasons, less risks of packages disappearing, and bugs actually being fixed in a timely manner. In my 15 years of user support, a huge majority of reported problems were with testing. But the sample might be biased by testing being the one chosen by less experienced users, wrongly thinking it would be some kind of middle ground between stable and unstable.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature