Re: Another "testing" vs "unstable" question
On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 11:13:37 -0500, Michael Satterwhite wrote:
> I've been watching the various discussions on this, and note that most
> experienced types think that the unstable distribution is better than
> the testing distribution. This leads me to one more question /
> observation
It happened in Sarge/testing when KDE 3.1 was entering. I haven't had any
"problems" with unstable (current) that I didn't have with testing (both
Woody and Sarge)...
... with one exception: I tried installing GNOME 2.0 from Ximian onto a
new Woody/testing system and I could neither get it to work nor downgrade
to GNOME 1.4.
> How does one recover from something like this short of doing a reload?
* Buddha enlightenment
* Expert assistance
* Educated guesses
* Trial and error
> Other than this, the arguments for the unstable over testing seem valid.
I'm convinced; also, my combination of "expert assistance", "educated
guesses" and "trial and error" have corrected the few things that have
gone wrong.
Reply to: