Re: [OT] testing on unstable sources list
On 4/1/20 6:46 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Mi, 01 apr 20, 15:49:25, dalios wrote:
>> On 3/30/20 2:26 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
>>
>>>> [...] and still retain testing in sources.list (having testing in
>>> sources.list when running unstable is a good idea anyway).
>>
>> Can you be so kind and explain to me how is that a good idea? I am
>> _definitely not_ as knowledgeable as you are, but that sounds strange
>> enough to make me wonder what have I missed...
>>
>> I have only tried unstable twice and only on secondary machines, just
>> for experimenting. This question is only for learning purpose.
>
> The recommendation is based on the statement of a Debian Release Manager
> some years ago[1].
>
> Basically it may happen that a particular package is removed from
> unstable, which will also affect other packages that depend on it.
>
> With testing in sources.list the package can be installed from there
> instead.
>
> Because apt[2] by default prefers newer versions of a package, if a
> package is available in unstable and testing with different versions the
> unstable version will be preferred.
>
> So the only downsides I can think of would be slightly longer download
> times on 'apt update' and possibly a late alert that a specific package
> is being removed from Debian (typically packages are removed from
> testing first, but it may happen the other way around as well).
>
> [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/03/msg00582.html
> [2] and other package managers like aptitude, etc.
>
> Hope this explains,
> Andrei
>
Thanks for the explanation.
Dalios
Reply to: