[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debian LTS?

On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 8:26 PM, 4k3nd0 <4k3nd0@googlemail.com> wrote:

> This is a major issue about Debian anyway.
> A good reason why i choose Debian instead to other distribution is simply,
> that the software is good tested and stable. That is what matters. System to
> maintain getting even harder with new Technologies like XEN/KVM. I just want
> to run the System and it should running on it on as possible without great
> times on maintaining.
> A LTS on Debian don't have to be every release, but Lenny should be one for
> example either wheezy then...
> LTS doesn't mean to back-port everything like RedHat does. Just to allow for
> the System to be more up to date with special feature or have to be intime
> Software. So that you have a supported Database all the time and so that it
> keep being supported.
> i would welcome a LTS of Debian
> Greeting's from Germany, 4k3nd0

In 5 years, upstream goes from svn to git, changes major version, more
than one time, software may even be renamed, unsupported, etc in that

I could love an LTS _wellsupported_ too, but if I just want to say
"mmm well security... I've a little probability that it happens to me,
will don't care about it" (system administration manual fail), then I
just point my sources.list to archive.debian.org and keep a infinite
Term service (to install/uninstall deb packages compiled with the same

I could not want a system that gets bakported (accross versions,
changes, etc) security upgrades for a 07% of what it's installed in
_any_ machine (kernel, libc, libpcap, ssl, etc). I could not sleep

People do not know howto educate a manager about opensource, lets keep
debian stable supported "as is" by 5 years.

I'm not the one to could say that backporting security patches for a
basic system is only a money problem. Ofcourse that people moves by
money, in special all those like me that need it, but you need
excellent skills too, in most bugs, and debian could need more disk
space, more build jobs for every arch, more concurrently supported
versions, more bugs to track, etc etc etc

Reply to: