Julio Merino wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm going to install a new debian system at home (as I commented in
> some other messages)... but I'm now wondering if installing the 2.2 or
> woody version...
>
> Since I discovered apt :-) in slink, I've been always using the
> unstable distribution. I would use 2.2, but in that version there are
> not the "latest" versions of some programs, for example, emacs, gnome,
> etc. And the problem of this, is that if I want to get one of this
> from the unstable I will have to download A LOT of dependencies that
> will make my installation a 2.2/woody mixture.
>
> Any good reasons to use one or another? If not, I'm going to install
> woody as I've always done... :)
Like a few others have said, it really depends on what the system will be
used for. If a production server, I'd say stay with potato as much as
possible. If a home workstation, I'd say go with whichever strikes your
fancy.
I've been running woody for a few months now with very few problems. Every
now and then a package will get a bit bollixed, but usually gets straightened
out in fairly short order.
--
Mike Werner KA8YSD | He that is slow to believe anything and
| everything is of great understanding,
'91 GS500E | for belief in one false principle is the
Morgantown WV | beginning of all unwisdom.
Attachment:
pgpl3ZNDuhcJP.pgp
Description: PGP signature