[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: What's the best package manager for single-package upgrades?

On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 02:35, Joe Rhett wrote:
> 1. Set the unstable archives to a higher preference in /etc/apt/preferences
> 2. "apt-get upgrade" to update the entire lot?
> 	... or am I missing a step?

That's about it. Simple really. :)

> I find it kindof sad that testing really doesn't appear to have any
> function any longer.  One would like to run from testing and leave unstable
> for the well, unstable stuff.  But I haven't really found much in testing,
> which means one must be stale, or bleed on the edge.  Sux.

Well, in my experience, testing is most useful immediately following a
new stable release, and least useful immediately preceding a new stable
release. If you were to have started using Sarge right after Woody came
out, I think you would have been rather happy. But now that everyone's
trying to get Sarge ready to ship out, there's not many current things
going in.

Though Sid is definitely not the bleeding edge of stuff in Debian. Sid
is, generally speaking, quite stable. There's the occasional hiccup, but
I can count on one hand the number of major problems I've had with Sid
in the entire time I've been using Debian. (About 2 years now)

If you really want bleeding edge, you add experimental to your
sources.list. That's where you get all the really fun stuff... :)

> In a perfect world, people would hammer things and then roll them into
> testing once they had been in unstable long enough without bug reports.
> This would allow us to keep high-uptime systems running the same kernels
> and such as our test/burn/destroy/rebuild laptops ;-) 

Well, that's basically exactly how it works. There's quite a few extra
details but that's the "meat and potatoes" of it so to speak. :)

Alex Malinovich
Support Free Software, delete your Windows partition TODAY!
Encrypted mail preferred. You can get my public key from any of the
pgp.net keyservers. Key ID: A6D24837

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: