Re: How unstable is "unstable"
Joe Emenaker wrote:
>
> I've noticed that all of the upgrades to packages usually go into
> "unstable".
>
> What, exactly, does "unstable" mean? Does it mean that the packages haven't
> been 'frozen' into a new release of Debian? Does it mean that the package
> itself is flaky? or does it mean that the version number of the packages
> that show up there are likely to change often?
>
> In short, how wary should I be about using things in "unstable"?
Unstable means "in flux" or "changing" as opposed to "tried and
tested" and "reliable". Usually the "unstable" stuff is reliable
and all, but from time to time you may run into a pothole - like
the time when a broken tar was released. And yes, with "unstable"
you're bound to see frequent updates of packages.
Ciao,
--
Thomas Baetzler, thb@regioservice.de, thb@spectre.ka.sub.org
<A HREF="http://home.pages.de/~thb/";>thb's Homepage</A>
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com
Reply to: