RE: Stable means not-changing?
On 23-Sep-97 Lukas Eppler wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Please tell me: Does stable mean not-changing or not-segfaulting?
I do not think stable was ment to be static. It was ment to mean tested and
known to work on a good many systems and even probably yours while unstable
means that it might or might not work on your particular configuration or that
it did not meet the developer's standards for a shipable system.
Feel free to take out the big bat and correct me if I am wrong.
Note that it is stable and unstable not stable and dynamic or static and
dynamic.
>
>Stable was not changing for weeks. I remember times (around Debian 1.2)
>when stable changed when non-segfaulting upgrades came out. I liked that a
>lot. It gave me the feeling to have the most-recent not-segfaulting
>software which is available, something which can't be done by sharing
>software on cd. Are there no new stable packages, or do I have to wait
>until a major upgrade is ready?
>
>--
>Lukas Eppler (godot)
> http://www.fear.ch
> telnet://soil.fear.ch:3333
> talk:godot@moon.fear.ch
>
>
>--
>TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
>debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
>Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
>
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: