Re: debian unstable, stable enough?
On 2006-09-08 13:58:15 +0200, 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. Yes, if you take regular
> backups of your important data.
I've been using unstable for a few years, and haven't had any real
breakage. It may happen that some package no longer works for a few
days and it may be difficult to revert to the previous version, but
at least, one has up-to-date software (compared to Debian stable),
hence less buggy in general.
Concerning testing vs unstable, I've a PowerPC machine under testing
(+ some unstable packages when need be) and an x86 machine under
unstable. And there's not much difference. Both of them have some
transitory problems.
> > 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.
I'd say fewer broken dependencies than in testing.
--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.org> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arenaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
Reply to: