Re: Debian has turned unusable.
Kevin Ruml wrote:
This topic/suggestion that desktop users should use "unstable" rather than
"stable", since it's no more unstable than other distros latest releases,
comes up regularly. What is the reason "unstable" isn't renamed to something
else to dispel the stigma the name gives? Not necessarily "desktop", but
there has to be something better than "unstable". I've been using Sid on my
desktop system for years with only a couple glitches over that time period
(requiring not "apt-get update"ing for a few days 'til it sorted itself out).
I'm sure there are a number of suggestions forthcoming - "latest" maybe.
Have you never had broken packages installed while tracking unstable? I
certainly have. And I include in this both applications with critical
errors and broken packages.
This situation would be unacceptable for a user who is not well versed
in Debian and its packaging system.
On the other hand, I see nothing wrong with recommending testing to a
new Debian user.
I would recommend using packages from unstable only on the following
conditions:
- apt-pinning is setup and explained
- the user is shown how to check for severe errors at upgrade/install time
Something else it occurs to me be useful is an automated way to consider
for install/upgrade only unstable packages which have been in the
repository for 2 days. Most of my problems have been cases where I have
happened to have upgraded before the severe error has been reported
against the package.
This would in effect create a "virtual" repository for the user which
would be a midpoint between unstable and testing.
dircha
Reply to: