Re: Ubuntu's unstable vs Debian unstable
Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
I'm not. I like Debian 'testing' except when it has missing and broken
packages (like it does now) so I switched to Debian 'unstable'. This
is very recent and so far/therefore I haven't experienced much
trouble. I was wondering about an alternative switch to Dapper
It was also a matter of choice:
I love Ubuntu, but the thought of having updates (bar security) half
yearly was unfavourable; Debian 'testing' is more favourably busy; it
was a choice of Ubuntu 'stable' or Debian 'testing' but that was
diverted to Debian 'unstable' since I'm afraid of Ubuntu 'unstable'.
Also an upgrade to Dapper is far more painful since the 2 projects
divert so much and a fresh install of Breezy is not acceptable, even
though it has GNOME 2.12.
First you should make up your mind:
- Do you want something stable, then stick to a stable release.
- do you want something that updates frequently and occasionally breaks,
than stick to 'unstable'
It's probably pointless to splitt hairs between different kinds of
'unstable'; you should always be prepared of things that might break.
You could also try to compile your own version of current software you
need. Then at least, when it's broken, you know who's fault it is :-)
PS: sorry for replying, Steve :-)