Re: bo, hamm, stable, unstable
On Mon, 26 Jan 1998, Markus Lechner wrote:
> Maybe this question is really stupid, but anyway:
>
> bo, hamm, stable, unstable, etc. What's this? Hamm means unstable or
> untested - concerning to the kernel or only to the software packages? I
> feel a bit outdated when running bo and it looks like the amount of
> problems is mostly the same - no matter whether running the stable or
> the unstable distribution. nitpic (for example) won't run on my system
> (but it should be stable, or not?). How can kde-beta2.2 (i got the
> Lehmanns CD) reside in stable? I do not understand what is actually
> stable and what's not - and how this relates to the kernel-version.
"Stable" is what it says, stable. It has been tested and has no known
serious bugs when released. Only bug fixes are added to it. "Unstable" is
where the development takes place, so packages might break at some time if
the developer made an error. One result of this policy is that new
programs are never added to stable.
The reason for a beta program to be in stable can be that the program
itself is reasonably stable and the "debianisation" (the process of making
a debian package from a program) has no knows errors.
bo and hamm are just code names. bo has been unstable when rex was stable
and hamm will become stable with the next release. The names actually are
names of figures from Pixar's movie Toy Story. Bruce Perens, who used to
be the project leader, works at Pixar.
Remco
--
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: