Re: Debian stable - updates
On 27-06-2021 18:01, Joe wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Jun 2021 08:12:07 -0500
> John Hasler <john@sugarbit.com> wrote:
>
>> Andrei writes:
>> > Unstable is challenging when you rely on that system for any kind of
>> > useful work, regardless if a movie night with friends or a big
>> > presentation at work, as each and every upgrade has the potential to
>> > break your system in new and interesting ways.
>>
>> I've run Unstable on my desktop for decades. It's been at least 15
>> years since an upgrade gave me any serious trouble. However, I don't
>> use a desktop environment (unless you call FVWM a DE) and I only
>> upgrade when it is both safe and necessary.
>>
>> I did recently have a problem with an Exim4 upgrade but I believe it
>> was primarily due to my customizations (I switched to Postfix as
>> that's the simplest way to do "wipe it all out and start over").
>
> I've had a logjam for most of a year on a few items which can't be
> upgraded because of an odd dependency issue involving guile-2.0 and 2.2.
>
> Yesterday, I had a need for inkscape, which I rarely use and which could
> only be installed by removing half a dozen programs I use much more
> often. So I put it on my stable netbook instead. When I'm sufficiently
> annoyed with the problem I'll do a reinstall but there are over 4000
> packages and if I do an automatic reinstall it will probably just
> recreate the same problem.
>
> I think unstable is fine if you have an alternative computer,
> (basically, owning a computer is fine if you have an alternative
> computer) but by itself can occasionally mess things up.
I've used Unstable for many years as a reliable base for a small
business, and it rarely lets me down in any serious way. I switched to
it after experiencing slow bug fixes on Testing. Occasionally one
programme or another may get a little flighty, but it doesn't affect the
rest of the system, and is always fixed within 24 hours.
I wouldn't think of moving.
Cheers!
Harry.
--
`When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty'
-- Thomas Jefferson
Reply to: