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

Re: change sources.list to follow testing, not jessie



On 04/16/2015 at 05:34 PM, Patrick Wiseman wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 5:25 PM, David Wright
> <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>> Quoting Joe (joe@jretrading.com):

>>> However long the wait, the result will be the same. In fact, the
>>> longer the wait, the more upgrades there will be in one go.
>> 
>> This may be true, but there's a difference. If you wait a few
>> months in jessie before moving to stretch, a lot more people will
>> have tried the latter and discussed, maybe fixed, the bugs that
>> crop up.
>> 
>>> Once the floodgates open into the new Testing, there will be a
>>> similar upheaval here in Sid, as software which has been kept
>>> back because it won't be compatible with the initial new Testing
>>> (which has to be smoothly upgraded from the present Testing) will
>>> then be dumped into Sid and pushed into Testing as soon as the
>>> magic two weeks have passed without complete disaster.
>>> Interesting times everywhere, except hopefully in the new
>>> Stable.
>> 
>> Lisi and I both suggested to stick with codenames, and jessie. This
>> means that the OP can choose exactly when to move distribution
>> instead of being at the mercy of the Debian release schedule.
>> 
>>> This upgrade of old Testing to new Testing is the first
>>> real-world preview of the *next* Stable upgrade, or at least some
>>> of it. I'm sure a lot of thought has gone into preparing for it.
>> 
>> Sure, but we're not all gagging for it.
> 
> I've had these lines in my sources.list for years:
> 
> deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ testing main contrib non-free
> deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ testing main contrib non-free
> 
> deb http://security.debian.org/ testing/updates main contrib non-free
> deb-src http://security.debian.org/ testing/updates main contrib non-free
> 
> Yes, things get interesting after the current testing stabilizes,
> with sometimes hundreds of updates at a time, but things don't get
> into the testing distribution unless they mostly work, and I've very
> rarely had to wait long for any wrinkles to work out. (I do NOT, of
> course, do this on a production server, but only on my personal
> boxes.)

Same here - with minor syntax tweaks, but the point is that I have
sources.list pointing to 'testing' by name. (And of course, yes, a
production server stays with stable or even oldstable until manual
testing has confirmed that something newer is ready to use for
production.)

Prior to that, I actually did the same thing with sid, again for years
straight. _That_ was a mistake; it ended up with my primary system in a
state which, while it did mostly work, I can only describe as "broken"
from a design perspective.

With testing, however, I haven't had major issues - and the ones I have
had have mostly been of the sort where the fix is to install a slightly
newer package version, either from sid or from experimental, which is
needed for my config but hasn't made it into testing yet.

I do generally wait a week or three after a new stable release before
dist-upgrading, and I _always_ review the apt-listchanges report for any
dist-upgrade before giving the go-ahead to proceed with it, but that's
about the limit of how far I go to avoid new-testing chaos.

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: