On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 08:22:20AM -0600, Kent West wrote:
> YH wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Is sarge stable to install?
> Depends on your criteria. For personal workstation use, I find even Sid
> to be stable enough for my needs, and that way I get all the newest goodies.
> If I were installing a non-critical server, I'd probably go with Stable.
> For a critical server, I'd stick with Woody for now.
> > I want to use 2.6 kernel, either I can upgrade kernel from woody or
> > re-install completely from Sarge, which one is better?
> If you're only wanting to upgrade your kernel, and the 2.6 series is not
> in the Woody repositories (implied from your post, but I haven't checked
> lately), and you have network access, you can add the Stable lines into
> your /etc/apt/sources.list file and then do:
> apt-get update
> apt-cache search kernel-image-2.6
> apt-get install [whatever 2.6 kernel you need/want that's now available]
> Once you have a working machine with the new kernel, if you then want to
> upgrade the entire system to Stable, follow up with:
> apt-get dist-upgrade
> No need to do a re-install. I personally would go the other direction.
> I'd upgrade my system first (with the dist-upgrade), then upgrade my
> kernel. But that's just me.
I don't think Sarge has been officially released. Woody is still the
official stable release. I think you meant Sarge in all above instances
where you made reference to stable.