Re: Question re Debian versions
On Thursday 18 March 2004 21:35, Paul Johnson wrote:
> "Monique Y. Herman" <spam@bounceswoosh.org> writes:
> > I'm not sure that "less stable" is the right term, but "less usable"
> > almost certainly is.
>
> backports.org is your friend.
Here's a question for the more experienced folks: is "downgrading" from
unstable to stable as easy as upgrading is?
Several months back, I decided to "move up" to unstable, because there were
some things I was using from testing to get more recent versions, and that
was causing problems as increasing numbers of dependencies were also coming
from testing, and I'd heard about testing not getting security fixes
quickly.
At the time, I hadn't heard of backports.org... so I decided to upgrade my
system to unstable.
For the most part, it's worked okay, except for a couple of times when I'd
upgrade things and something important would stop working... but I'm not
sure any more that I'm really that comfortable on the "bleeding edge". I
*can* fix things -- I'm a Unix sysadmin in my day job -- but honestly,
after spending all day fixing *other* people's computer problems, I want a
system that just works at home.
I know that at worst, I could back up /home and reinstall Woody, but I'd
rather not have to redo some of the custom configuration I've done. Thus
my question.
Alternatively, how soon is Sarge going to become stable? I suppose another
way to do it would be to switch my sources.list to point to Sarge and see
if that would work -- I'd think that that would be an easier "downgrade".
Then when Sarge becomes stable, I could switch my sources.list to point to
stable, and start using backports.org for things I decide I want a more
recent version of...
Thoughts? Suggestions?
--
|\ _,,,---,,_ Travis S. Casey <efindel@earthlink.net>
ZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ No one agrees with me. Not even me.
|,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-'
'---''(_/--' `-'\_)
Reply to: