[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Desktop user: Etch or the next testing?



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 04/02/07 13:10, Wei Chen wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
> 
>> It's not officially supported in Stable because the policy is that
>> Stable only gets security updates, not feature updates.
> Oh, didn't know that.

Yup.

http://www.debian.org/doc/FAQ/ch-getting.en.html#s-updatestable

    No new functionality is added to the stable release. Once
    a Debian version is released and tagged `stable' it will
    only get security updates. That is, only packages for which
    a security vulnerability has been found after the release
    will be upgraded. All the security updates are served through
    security.debian.org.

    Security updates serve one purpose: to supply a fix for a
    security vulnerability. They are not a method for sneaking
    additional changes into the stable release without going
    through normal point release procedure. Consequently, fixes
    for packages with security issues will not upgrade the soft-
    ware. The Debian Security Team will backport the necessary
    fixes to the version of the software distributed in `stable'
    instead.

>> Another important question: are you a "user" who just wants to get
>> his work done, or a "computer geek enthusiast"?
> 
> I am mainly the first type, but I occasionally want to play with my
> computer.

So, how important is it for you to have (relatively) recent versions
of client software (NOTING that current stable uses the ancient
firefox 1.0.4, and that sticking with stable would mean that Etch
will be at iceweasel 2.0.0.3 when it is just as antique as FF 1.0.4
is now)?

- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGEUsGS9HxQb37XmcRAjkKAJwIY5KE8YDrSc00ZAq4KiXx8tqOYwCaAoY4
ogGwRHsdrAY9djGhGCMWKSc=
=FHVs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: