On Friday 26 July 2002 20:19, you wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 06:57:47PM +0100, Martin Garton wrote:
> > On 26 Jul 2002, David wrote:
> Debian's stable releases are always basically out of date. However, they
To true, and unfortunately there's no distinction between system software,
and user applications, which are generally what ppl want updates on, and they
_DO_ _NOT_ in general cause system 'instability'. There is very, very
little risk trying out a new software program under Linux, and even less,
with a packaging system as good as .deb / dpkg / apt.
> The Debian system has a heirarchy of distributions. New versions of
> packages go into 'unstable' (otherwise known as Sid[2]). Once they've
> had no Release Critical bugs filed against them for 6 weeks they will
> drop into 'testing' (which used to be 'Woody' and is now 'Sarge'). Once
> a while, the contents of testing are frozen, and major bug fixing
> parties are held to eliminate 'important' (and some other type too)
> bugs. Eventually, those packages will be declared as 'stable' and a
> release made.
I gave up on Debian, used Potato for very long time, because there was no
Testing, perhaps the policy changed, but that was only made available when
'woody/unstable', was being 'theoretically frozen'.
Perhaps the Debian policy changed but when 2.2 (Potato) was released it was
bang up to date on most things, whereas 3.0 (Woody) is obsolete already due
to User Interface improvements, on things like KDE and GNOME.
Hopefully they'll go for smaller changes, with more regular releases and keep
Testing about, it seems like a very good idea, but that DID NOT happen after
last stable release, and most Debian users went to Woody / unstable.
Rob
--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.lug.org.uk http://www.linuxportal.co.uk
http://www.linuxjob.co.uk http://www.linuxshop.co.uk
--------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Wed 31 Jul 2002 - 15:07:05 BST