Re: Eliminating upgrade confusion
On Friday 10 June 2005 13:37, Guillaume TESSIER was heard to say:
> Thanks Curt!
You're very welcome.
> I guess many users choose sarge testing cause woody was pretty
> outdated.
Yep. And they were warned, many times in many forums, that when Sarge
went "stable" then "testing" would be a nightmare for months, at
least, with updating and, well, TESTING! That's kind of the point.
> However, i'm not a purist and thought i'd just stick with
> sarge when i get stable - at least for the first years.
That is a wise course of action, which I would recommend to anyone who
wants to track the "testing" branch.
Personally, I use either stable or unstable depending on application.
I don't like the way that testing goes to the wall (like right now),
nor that things can be broken in testing for quite a while as
problems are thrashed out. No promises of stability in testing, again
that is kind of the point.
> However some of my friends are quiet upset.
They should file wish-list bugs against apt, asking that the name be
tracked. At least, it will spur discussion amongst the developers.
> So, yes, by default, it could be great that the installer put the
> real name of the version cause for certain users, the "slide"
> looked more like a grind.
No kidding! When I first read the descriptions of Debian (which was my
first Linux distribution too!), I tried "testing". It didn't work,
same as testing isn't working right now, and someone gave me the same
advice I've given. Go stable at first, upgrade as needed when needed.
> G
Curt-
--
September 11th, 2001
The proudest day for gun control and central
planning advocates in American history
Reply to: