Re: Question re Debian versions
On 2004-03-19, Paul Johnson penned:
>
> "Monique Y. Herman" <spam@bounceswoosh.org> writes:
[snip]
>> Unstable is where bug fixes, new packages, etc are first introduced
>> into a debian distribution. (There's also something called
>> "experimental," but that's not a proper distribution.)
>
> The important ones, like security updates, make it down pretty
> quickly.
>
>> Say you have package A that makes it past unstable and into testing.
>> Then someone finds a bug in package A. It turns out to be an icky
>> bug, and it takes quite a while to fix it. The bug will be fixed in
>> unstable before trickling down into testing.
>
> And in unstable, a package can be broken for months. It's really not
> for people who aren't ready to work for it at times.
>
>> Also, look at security updates. Updates are provided for stable and
>> unstable almost immediately. Then those using testing distributions
>> must wait the allotted amount of time before receiving the unstable
>> update in testing.
>
> If you're in a spot where security is absolutely critical, you should
> only be using stable anyway.
I wasn't claiming that unstable is a better choice than stable for, er,
stability; I was claiming it was a better choice than testing.
--
monique
Reply to: