Re: I've been getting scanned...
On Sun, May 27, 2001 at 10:59:47AM -0400, Carl Fink wrote:
> On Sun, May 27, 2001 at 12:20:14AM -0500, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> > If you don't want to be running year-old software (with the latest security
> > fixes backported), switch over to testing instead.
>
> Bad news: testing *is* year-old software. By the time it's stable it'll be
> two eyars old.
Unless I'm mistaken, testing is mostly software that hasn't changed in
unstable for two weeks. Making an allowance for bursts of minor changes and
things being held back by dependencies and cross-package conflicts (which you
probably don't want on your system anyhow, which makes this a good thing,
IMO), most testing packages are within 1-2 months of unstable.
So, are you claiming that unstable is 10-11 months old? (BTW, I just got
around to pulling kernel 2.4.4 out of testing... I don't deny that there's
likely to be some year-old stuff in testing, but I doubt that it's the
majority and I know that a fair bit of unstable is more recent than that.)
Based on my observations of the (pre-testing) slink->potato changeover
and my understanding of how testing works, I would suspect that most of
woody's package aging en route to stable will be taking place in frozen,
not testing.
--
That's not gibberish... It's Linux. - Byers, The Lone Gunmen
Geek Code 3.12: GCS d? s+: a C++ UL++++$ P++>+++ L+++>++++ E- W--(++) N+
o+ !K w--- O M- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t 5++ X+ R++ tv+ b+ DI++++ D G e* h r y+
Reply to: