Re: bo, hamm, stable, unstable

[Markus Lechner <Markus.Lechner@munich.netsurf.de>]

Jens Ritter wrote:

> You don´t have to. I always run my production system as bo (but ok, I
> have got an unstable system, too. That´s because I want to take part
> in the development.) The advantages/disadvantages of a hamm system are:
>
> 1) glibc6
> 2) New source format for packages
> 3) A lot of more packages.
> 4) Sometimes new uploads of packages can be broken.
>
> Unless you plan to develop libc6 or want to have some of the new
> packages, there´s no need to upgrade.
>

I want to develop, but not take part in the Linux development (maybe later,
when i got into Linux deep enough to actually understand what to do). So it's
better for me to use the stable kernel and packages, i think. Correct me if
i'm wrong.

Thanks for the information,

    Mac



--
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 .