Re: question for sources.list
On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 03:00:39PM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> Paul E Condon wrote:
> >>>Personally, I was rather disappointed when I first made this discovery
> >>>in apt/preferences. I thought I had figured out a neat lazy-man's way
> >>>to handle the transitions from one stable release to the next. But I
> >>>won't describe it because I have established that it doesn't work.
> I have to agree that this is disappointing. I had thought it made sense
> to use the release names so that you weren't forced into an upgrade you
> weren't prepared to do. Not that one could be surprised by the release
> of a new version....
> >>I confess my vast ignorance of how all the developers, release
> >>managers, etc do their work on debian, but isn't the whole point of
> >>the operation to provide us, as users, with a system that is as
> >>easy as possible to use (without MS-type dumbing down, of course)?
I suspect that the developers have some self interest in their work on
Debian. Debian provides each of them with a much better Linux distribution
than any one of them could ever hope to generate for himself, by himself.
And also the community discussions as to Debian policy help each of them
improve the sysadmin aspects of his own computer operation. The we, pure
users, also benefit is a nifty side effect of a bunch of smart guys doing
good work for themselves and sharing it globally.
> What prevents a regular apt-get upgrade from rolling you from woody into
> sarge? I'm not a complete n00b, but fresh enough to think that if you're
> set to "stable" that your regular upgrade would have done that. If I had
> been running stable when sarge was moved up, would my apt-get upgrades
> have styed pointed to woody until I dist-upgraded? I'm not sure now. My
Paul E Condon