on Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 12:57:56AM -0600, Dr. Aldo Medina (aldo_medina@yahoo.com) wrote: > "David B. Harris" wrote: > > > > To quote "Dr. Aldo Medina" <aldo_medina@yahoo.com>, > > > For example, Why are so many packages from older version of > > > programs. For example X-chat, wwwoffle ,ncftp and even XFree's > > > packages are from very old versions of the actual programs. I > > > believe dpkg is the absolute best in terms of packaging system (I > > > come from RedHat's rpm). That's why I think twice to install a new > > > non-deb version of some program, even when I need some of the new > > > features (like XFree 4). So what do you recommend? > > > > Debian is split up into three distributions: Potato/stable, > > Woody/testing, Sid/unstable. Potato is the stable distribution, and is > > generally meant for servers. When you install Potato, you can be sure > > that nothing will be changed out from underneath you. You can run > > 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade' without worry. > > > > Woody/testing and Sid/unstable are generally what people run on their > > desktops. Woody is "safer" than Sid, in that new/updated packages are > > uploaded to the Sid repositories before they're automatically added to > > Woody(a few conditions have to be met; the package in Sid can't have > > been updated for at least two weeks, the package in Sid has to have a > > lesser or equal number of bugs, and a few other things). Woody is > > actually fairly up-to-date. glibc 2.2, GNOME 1.2, KDE2, lots of goodies. > > XFree86 4.0.x hasn't made it in, and the Linux kernel 2.4.0 hasn't been > > packaged yet. Sid has XFree86 4.0.2, but the kernel is still 2.2.x. > > However, you can upgrade to 2.4.0 easily(if you run Sid). > > > > So, if you want more recent packages, you should change all references > > to "stable" or "potato" in your /etc/apt/sources.list to either > > "testing" or "unstable". > > > > You can also add a deb-src line in your /etc/apt/sources.list pointing > > to unstable. Then, whenever you 'apt-get source <package>', you'll be > > getting the unstable version of that package. You can then use > > 'dpkg-buildpackage -uc -b' (as root, in the directory(ies) created by > > the 'apt-get source') to get binary .debs for your system. This isn't a > > guaranteed solution, but it has always worked for me. > > > > David Barclay Harris, Clan Barclay > > Aut agere, aut mori. (Either action, or death.) > > Ok. So, I understand I can make the change and dselect will just get the > new versions as updates without any problem? In theory. But yeah, that's the general idea. The further back from the edge you stay, the less likely things are to blow up. > I will install debian in another (workstation) machine. Can I install > directly the "woody" version on it? Thanks for your help I'd recommend sticking to "stable" initially. It's better to track by release status than by distribution name -- you'll gracefully upgrade to the next release when it becomes stable, rather than being stuck on "potato" forever. If you decide that dealing with the occasional wart is an acceptable compromise for having newer packages, move to testing. I run one box on "stable", one on "unstable" (this was the old split). Haven't looked to testing yet, though I suspect my laptop will be headed that way shortly. -- Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org
Attachment:
pgp17l6eSO4fE.pgp
Description: PGP signature