Re: Stupid Noob Question: Surfing the 'Testing' edge
On Wednesday 14 February 2007 17:36, Michael S. Peek wrote:
> Hi Debian gurus,
>
> I jumped aboard the Debian bandwagon mid-Sarge, and so that's the
> version of Debian that our machines are currently running. As Etch
> nears it's completion I've been preparing for the upgrade from Sarge to
> Etch. Since I'm still pretty new to Debian, I'm a little iffy when it
> comes to understanding parts of the the Sarge=stable, Etch=testing,
> Sid=unstable implementation behind Debian development. Specifically,
> I've seen several warnings now about making sure to change "testing" to
> "etch" in /etc/apt/sources.lst once Etch goes stable. (For testing
> purposes I've just always left it "etch".) But what if what I want is
> to keep our machines at "testing"? It seems to have the latest and
> grooviest versions of stuff. So how badly would I be shooting myself in
> the foot if I changed "etch" to "testing" in /etc/apt/sources.lst and
> just left it that way?
>
> Michael
Personally, if you have sufficient harddrive space, I'd keep your current Etch
install pointing to Etch in /etc/apt/sources.list. then I would install
another instance of Etch. I'd keep this pointing to Etch, then when Etch goes
stable I'd point /etc/apt/sources.list for your new Etch install to the
testing repo. this way you have one install which you know works ok, and the
new Etch, now testing/Lenny install.
I've had no real problems with my Etch/upgraded from Sarge install. From time
to time some packages have been removed when doing an apt-get dist-upgrade. I
lost Rosegarden4 for about 6 weeks, then it came back as available.
If you have the harddrive space, doing it this way, at least you have a distro
you know works, and your new install of Etch that you have pointed to the
testing repo can be viewed as a bit experimental. This way, if for some
reason Lenny goes seriously pearshaped, you can boot into your stable Etch.
As I say, I've had no serious problems, apart from losing some packages for a
while.
my 2¢ worth
Nigel.
Reply to: