Re: Stable vs. Testing Vs. Unstable
Incoming from Loren M. Lang:
> I'm curious about how many people are actually using Debian Unstable or
> Testing to Stable for normal desktop use or even a production server.
I've never felt any need for anything but stable. I've never been one
to think newer is necessarily better. I update for security or
stability. I've no need for the bleeding edge. Every upgrade comes
with its own brand new set of bugs, so why not stick with the ones
you've got if you can?
> I've being using Gentoo lately, and I love how nice the newer software
Gentoo sounds pretty cool too, but then so does Crux. Me, I like Debian.
> is like KDE 3.2.1 or Gnome 2.4 and I don't want to go back to Gnome 1.x
I was forced to use KDE for about a year and hated it from the first
moment I saw it. Then I ran Gnome for a year or so too and just gave
up on it recently as well. I found them both near impossible to
control to my liking (looks pretty but fails regularly in nonsensical
ways), and am now very happy running Fluxbox. It's even easier to
control than fvwm was when I ran it when I started.
I don't begrudge anyone else using that stuff; that's up to them.
Just don't expect me to. And if you like Gentoo, take a look at
Crux. It's kind of like Rock Linux + LinuxFromScratch + Gentoo, on
steroids.
--
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*) http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling
- -
Reply to: