testing .v. unstable .v. sarge (WAS Re: apt-get Failure)
> On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:13:12 +0000, michael
> <linux@networkingnewsletter.org.uk> wrote:
>> Michael Spang wrote:
>
>> so what do I do meantime? I'm in the middle of switching from stable to
unstable when it hit the `sed` issue & aborted the dist-upgrade. I
guess
>> i have to wait for the bug-fix to get into unstable and then try again?
(BTW followed the link in another email but it didn't really help me)
>
> Sit tight - welcome to the world of unstable! Better get used to it ;)
Inspired by the above and not being able to find anything recent in the
mailing lists, may I ask people's views on which flavour (is that the
correct term?) of Debian out of testing & unstable is currently
recommended for a workstation (which will be used for running scientific
codes, should not crashing for months on end, is secure from hackers and
able to handle things like Fortran & C (running with MPI), Intel compilers
(don't flame me!) and, probably, NFS mounts with other boxes in the
locality)
I initially went for 'stable' (woody) but it was too out of date for my
Ethernet card & hard drive. I've now installed 'testing' (sarge) and have
followed recommendations in the "Securing Debian Manual". However, I've
been warned that there are no security updates for 'testing'. I also see
hints on this list that 'sarge' is about to be the new 'stable' (although
I'm unsure how & when!) from which I infer that there will soon be
security updates for 'sarge'. Therefore, I think I'm as well staying with
'sarge' rather than moving to 'unstable' (sid), particularly in light of
the above ''sed'' problem (as an example).
For those with eagle eyes, yes I am talking now about a different system
to the initial (apt-get failure) case!
Many thanks to all!
Michael
Reply to: