Re: debian unstable, stable enough?
On 2006-09-14 17:33:17 +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> This is the rule for stable. Grave bugs are fixed for the next update
> though.
And this can take months. Losing mail for months is not acceptable.
> > There are other problems with Debian/stable, such as external
> > software that can't be installed because Debian/stable is not
> > up-to-date; such external software may be necessary for some
> > users.
> >
> > Another example is Subversion, that needs a recent version of
> > OpenSSH (with connection sharing) for performance reasons.
>
> That's not a bug, it's a feature.
A lack of feature, due to the fact that stable is not up-to-date.
> That's exactly what makes stable so stable. Backports helps
> sometimes.
But backports are no longer stable and have their own problem
(e.g. security updates are not guaranteed, which may make them
worse than unstable).
> If, for example, X is broken (which can and did happen), how is he
> supposed to write to d-u? I cant imagine the average cluebie to be
> able to use TUI mailers.
No need for X to write to d-u. And even if the whole machine is broken
(which can happen any time, even with stable, e.g. due to hardware
failure or intrusion), you can use another machine.
--
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: