Re: How "unstable" is unstable?
On Sun, 2003-07-06 at 21:57, Marino Fernandez wrote:
> On Sunday 06 July 2003 9:10 pm, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > On 06 Jul 2003 21:07:42 -0400
> >
> > Neal Lippman <nl@lippman.org> wrote:
> > > I'm wondering, from those running sid, just how "unstable" is it at the
> > > present time?
> > >
> > > The reason I am asking is that I would like to move on to KDE 3 and am
> > > feeling behind the times, still using KDE 2.1 in woody. I've been
> > > reluctant to track sid since I do need my workstation to be up and
> > > working pretty well, so I'd be interested in hearing from some who are
> > > using unstable regularly.
>
> Sid is doing pretty good for me. I have a knoppix/debian install plus gnome
> 2.2 (that is KDE 3.1.2, Mozilla 1.3.2, Evolution 1.4, Openoffice 1.0.3,
> kernel 2.4.21, XFree86 4.3) in my laptop... and what can I say, other that
> some minor bugs (i.e. the pgp plugin for KMail (or any other email client)
> does not work), everything works perfectly... I had it for 2 months now.
I've been using sid for just over two years now and have never had my
system not be usable. Since I use it in my office as my only computer
and it must work, I have a couple of rules of thumb that have served me
well.
When I decide to do an upgrade (usually once a week or so) I first
download the new packages, then scan the devel and user mailing lists
for a couple of days to see if any problems have cropped up before doing
an actual install. This will save me from any critical problem because
someone else will trip over it and scream :)
Occasionally (especially with with closely related package groups like
kde and gnome) an upgrade will want to remove packages I use to satisfy
dependencies for other packages; I just wait for a few days for the
dependencies to settle out, and check again. I think the longest I went
between upgrades was about 2 months during the gnome1->gnome2
switchover, since that's the desktop I use and I decided to be extra
conservative.
--
First Impressions are Bunk.
Reply to: