Re: Release statusus
Hi,
On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 02:43:42PM +0200, Neo wrote:
> Hi Colin,
>
> so, sumarizing for my situation: it's no use tracking a
> unstable 'release' because it just isn't that: a release, and never
> will be.
Never. You are correct.
> It's stabiblity level will vary over time, (for instance
> tomorrow somebody might decide to drop linux 2.6.0-test6 in unstable)
> while the testing release's stability will increase untill it's
> mature enough to become a stable release. (After which testing will
> fall back again, I presume, to testing's level of stability.)
Kernel packages do not upgrade except for minor debian packaging
version. Any change from say 2.6.0-test6 to 2.6.0-test7 will be
different package and you must manually choose to install them.
> Then why not take the logical step, pick a kernel release
> (or combination of linux/hurd/*bsd releases), put a name on it,
> put it in testing and let it grow to a stable release? This name
> sid just confuses things, in my humble opinion.
By the way, kernel-image-* is the current linux kernel binary
distribution names. Please get used to how packages are named.
Good luck and cheers.
Osamu
Reply to: