Re: Jessie sufficiently stable for general use?
On Friday 06 March 2015 23:15:12 Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Friday 06 March 2015 15:22:21 Miles Fidelman wrote:
> > Brian wrote:
> > > On Fri 06 Mar 2015 at 09:27:23 -0800, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > >> On Fri, 06 Mar 2015, Ken Heard wrote:
> > >>> Thanks everybody for the collected wisdom. So for me now Jessie
> > >>> RC1 is it.
> > >>
> > >> FYI: Do daily updates using dist-upgrade, instead of upgrade (or
> > >> the equivalent with aptitude, if you use that). Things change
> > >> quickly and sometimes majorly on the path to Stable. You'll want
> > >> to get ALL those changes -- minor and major. "Upgrade" won't do
> > >> that. This is recommended by Debian. Once Jessie is Stable, revert
> > >> to "upgrade" for the most part.
> > >
> > > I agree with everything but the final sentence. Stable is unlikely
> > > to pull in any new packages but if it does you will likely need
> > > them. In other words, 'dist-upgrade' should be the norm for stable.
> >
> > Somehow, anything that needs daily updates, or upgrades, does not meet
> > any definition of "stable" that I'm familiar with.
> >
> > Miles Fidelman
It doesn't. I would say it needs weekly updates. And ir has been said ot
be "stable enough for general use" not "stable". It's not teh sam ehting.
Lisi
Reply to: