Re: debian unstable, stable enough?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Jochen Schulz wrote:
> Jordi Carrillo:
>> I'm using Debian testing and I was thinking about switching to unstable. Is
>> Debian unstable, stable enough for a Desktop system?
>
> No, if you rely on your system to be available 100% (time and function
> wise). No, if you don't (know how to) use the BTS, dpkg, apt, package
> documentation. If you don't know how to upgrade (and cannot find out
> except by asking here), take that as a sign that unstable is not stable
> enough for you.
>
> Yes if you have fun living on the edge. Yes, if you have enough time on
> your hands to fix a breakage now and then.
But isn't Windows like that? I *know* that Mandrake "stable" is
like that.
IOW, how much do you know about managing a Debian system, since
*something* (big, small, middle) will break every month.
> Yes, if you take regular
> backups of your important data.
Really? Nothing that bad has ever happened to me.
>> Are there broken dependencies in unstable?
>
> Yes, sometimes. But that usually just means that you have to wait
> upgrading or installing a particular package. Most of the time you can
> still install an earlier version from testing or stable.
- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
Is "common sense" really valid?
For example, it is "common sense" to white-power racists that
whites are superior to blacks, and that those with brown skins
are mud people.
However, that "common sense" is obviously wrong.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFFAWHjS9HxQb37XmcRAru6AKCg7GPFHkHJz0yMcKpP4QjhnzJlawCbBLVQ
obOpUc5wuLZtsKGxt6RLl8M=
=pokY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: