Hendrik Boom wrote:
Yes, this is what I meant. If package 'foo' in unstable is dependent on 'bar' which is not in unstable but is in stable, you may still be able to install 'foo' using stable's version of 'bar' as the dependency.On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 08:43:23AM -0500, Kent West wrote:I would recommend duplicating the Stable lines, rather than replacing them. Then replace the "stable" or "sarge" in the first (top) set with your release of choice. This way, the system can fall back to packages in Stable if it (or you) need(s) to.If you do this, it will pick the stable package is there is no testing package available.
This is not what I meant, but I'm glad you mentioned it since I failed to make myself clear.But taking out the lines containing "testing" won't give you a downgrade if you decide you want to go back. Downgrading isn't so easy.
It's my understanding that because of their high-priority nature, security updates go into Stable even before they sometimes make it into Testing (or perhaps, Unstable?). So a Testing system with the stable security line is more likely to get patched more quickly than waiting for the normal influx of packages into Testing.Also, don't change the "security" line; leave it at stable.testing doesn't get the so-called security upgrades, which are carefully chosen upgrades for stable to maintain security while changing as little as possible. Testing gets lots and lots of updates instead.
My understanding may very well be amiss, however. -- Kent