Re: Relative stability of Testing vs Unstable

[Fungi4All <fungilife@protonmail.com>]

From: songbird@anthive.com

To: debian-user@lists.debian.org

John Hasler wrote:

> songbird writes:

>> i"ve been running testing with bits from unstable and/or experimental

>> for quite some time now.

>

> Experimental is a completely different kettle of fish.

of course. :) it is not like i"m using a lot of

things from there. more like one or two items.

> Unstable

> contains packages that the developer hopes and expects will migrate to

> Testing and end up in Stable without incident, and he"s usually right.

> Experimental, on the other hand, contains packages that the developer

> wants people to experiment with. It is not a mistake or policy

> violation to upload a package known to contain a grave bug to

> Experimental.

i usually check if there is a newer version there

if i"m experiencing a bug in a version that is in

testing or unstable to see if the newer version solves

the bug. most recently it was libreoffice, but the

newer version didn"t make any difference so i purged

it and reinstalled the testing version again (and then

worked around the issue).

between sid and experimental it is only a pound sign move from one

source line to the next.  An update will satisfy your curiosity without

an upgrade.  Last I checked there were only 2-3 kernels that were

under experimentation, nothing else different from my sid installation.

Do I care to mess around with linux-rc ?  Not really, so I just went

back.  Possibly after stretch stability there may be a ton of stuff.

By the way, 4.12 was announced as stable and there is no 4.13 

yet. https://www.kernel.org/

songbird