Re: Unstable vs. Stable
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: Unstable vs. Stable
- From: Ed Down <E.M.Down@city.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 12:51:02 +0000 (GMT)
- Message-id: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970225124341.28736E-100000@exeter>
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On 24 Feb 1997, Guy Maor wrote:
> Ed Down <E.M.Down@city.ac.uk> writes:
> > But, on the ftp site, doesn't rex contain what was, in effect, the
> > original 1.2.0 release in total?
> No, not in total, just a subset. Source and binaries in 1.2.0 that
> have been replaced by files in rex-updates are removed. Otherwise it
> would be impossible to fit Debian 1.2 on one CD.
> You can still upgrade to the latest by pointing dselect at stable.
Hmmm, I wasn't aware of this. Couldn't debian fit the last release in
total on the ftp site in a 'frozen' state for ftp users? I for one was
happy with the 1.2 release 'out of the box' and would probably not have
bothered upgrading until the next release if it had been possible extra
packages from the original release. But maybe I'm in a minority of one
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