Re: Stupid Noob Question: Surfing the 'Testing' edge
On Wed, 2007-02-14 at 11:36 -0500, 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?
Another option is to stay with Etch and use backports for newer versions
of software you or your users are impatient for. How well that works
depends upon whether there are backports available for the software
you're most concerned about -- or, on whether or not you are comfortable
backporting releases yourself. If you're really primarily concerned
with getting the latest and grooviest browsers, email clients, office
apps, etc., then the backports solution would probabably work well. If
you're primarily concerned with the whole system being closer to cutting
edge, then it wouldn't really meet your needs.
You just have to be prepared for the fact that closer to cutting edge =
more unresolved bugs.
http://www.backports.org/dokuwiki/doku.php
--
Michael M. ++ Portland, OR ++ USA
"No live organism can continue for long to exist sanely under conditions
of absolute reality; even larks and katydids are supposed, by some, to
dream." --S. Jackson
Reply to: