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

Re: When stability is pointless



Hello,

Sam Kuper wrote:
Hi Doug,

Thanks for your comments.

2008/11/5 Douglas A. Tutty <dtutty@vianet.ca>:
Or, are you saying that you are trying to implement a psad recipe from
the internet that doesn't apply to the version of psad supplied in
Ubuntu?

Essentially correct. But not just any old set of psad instructions:
the instructions provided on the psad website and in the developer's
book on Linux firewalls. In other words, pretty much the most
comprehensive set of instructions I could find.

For all Ubuntu is based on Debian, I don't think it follows debian
policy.  The policy manual says, basically and among other things, that
installing a package should result in that package working
out-of-the-box in some fashion only needing tweaking by the sysadmin.

Define "working" (or "tweaking"). My experience with some packages in
Etch suggest that Debian sometimes has problems like this too.

So far I can understand, Etch is not yet stable.


I've never used psad but I would be very surprised if the problem you
experienced were to happen were you running Debian Stable.

You may be right. Perhaps I should go back to Debian Stable. But one
of the reasons I switched to Ubuntu was to minimise the gap between a
package being deprecated by its developer and deprecated by its
maintainer, in an effort to avoid precisely the sort of problem I
outlined in my post.

Since Ubuntu is based not on Debian Stable but on (I think) Unstable, I
don't know how one can consider any Ubuntu release to be stable.

Ubuntu has LTS (Long-Term Support) releases, which roughly translate to Stable.

However, I think this is perhaps missing the point.

Sam



hth,
Jerome


Reply to: