On Wednesday, 30.03.2005 at 06:40 -0500, Michael Katz wrote: > Why does debian stable use glibc 2.2.5 which is over 3 years old? > > Using such old technology makes a real pain in the butt for your > users, especially the app writers that need to spend lots of extra > resources trying to support this old stuff. > > it seems that stability to debian is more of an acronym for old. This is a really old argument. You *always* need to trade-off security and stability (in both the "doesn't change" sense and in the "doesn't break" sense) against bleeding-edge. If you want newer software with Debian, you can have it. Just use Sarge or Sid. Debian Stable is not for you. (As an aside, what applications are you writing which depend so strongly on the version of glibc?) Dave. -- Please don't CC me on list messages! ... Dave Ewart - davee@sungate.co.uk - jabber: davee@jabber.org All email from me is now digitally signed, key from http://www.sungate.co.uk/ Fingerprint: AEC5 9360 0A35 7F66 66E9 82E4 9E10 6769 CD28 DA92
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature