How unstable is unstable?
Hi,
I have have been using Debian for a couple of months and I am happy with how
it runs.
As a new user I wonder about stable vs unstable. I often get in trouble because
I need to compile software that for instance depends on libc6 or a newer
versions of GTK. The result is that I have been updating parts of my system to
be able to run certain applications.
So my question is: Does unstable mean
you will have all kinds of crashes and unexpected behavior, or does it mean
that some programs might have more bugs than running in the stable
distribution?
I mean, if unstable means it has as many bugs as Windows, "the
whole world" could actually be tricked into using it ;) (see: MS Market
policies). But I assume higher standards here, and wonder how unstable it
actually would be on my box?
I know stability is essentila to people using Linux as for instance web servers,
and that 92% uptime is MUCH worse than 98%. But for me, a normal business user,
the only thing that really conserns me is if running unstable means I often will
loose data or that I will have to go back to work like I did with Win 98: 20%
of my work day dealing with rebooting.
It is almost too easy to do: "apt-get dist-upgrade". Should I? :)
Advice would be greatly appreciated.
-----------------------------------
Regards,
Christian Dysthe
Email: cdysthe@bigfoot.com
http://www.bigfoot.com/~cdysthe
ICQ 3945810
Date: 22-Apr-99
Time: 18:06:29
This message was sent by XFmail
Powered by Debian GNU/Linux
-----------------------------------
Reply to: