I didn't know how to find out which version of a package was in which branch. I still don't know how to do it,"apt-cache policy <packagename>"
Thanks!
but I decided to be brave and install KDE 3.2.x, so I went "apt-get -t unstable install kde"The name "unstable" is meant to convey amongst other things that it is not meant for new users.
Please correct me if I'm wrong. I thought I could use packages from unstable for non-critical parts of the system. When they break, I can just go back to the version in testing/stable, no?
What I really miss in the Linux distributions I've used, is a good package management with frequent updates. That's why I don't want to use a stable-only system. However, I do like the security updates of the stable system, so I thought of using that as the basis and adding on testing/unstable packages. Is this feasable or am I looking for trouble? Should something like using KDE from unstable on a stable system work? Could you please explain why?
and hell started.Hmm... there must be a nice Hellraiser metaphor in this.
I'm not really into horror, especially not when my computers are concerned.
After some forcing and trial and error, I know this is not the way to do it, but I still don't know what is. Can anybody tell me what I did wrongTrying to use "unstable" as a new user.and what I should do?Try to run "testing" perhaps. Or stick with "stable" a little while longer until you feel more confident using the package management system. Read http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html and reconsider if "hell started" is the kind of feedback that helps developers to improve the system so that others will have a better experience in the future.
"hell started" was used for rhetorical purposes, not as feedback to the developers, since it's an incompetent user problem, in my opinion. The hell I was refering to, was my very own dependency hell...
Thanks for the help, Tim