Package: debian-installer Version: 20070308etch2 Severity: normal It's almost a daily occurence on #debian for people to come in with broken systems because the installer has given them a sources.list with 'stable', and they've unintentionally upgraded partially to a new release by doing a simple packaging operation. It seems that it would be better for the installer to use explicit release names instead of 'stable'. Of course, the fact that people are having trouble with something doesn't necessarily mean that it's wrong. Even so, I can't see the upside of using 'stable'. An oldstable->stable upgrade is not simple enough that it makes sense for it to happen as a natural result of using the packaging tools as opposed to because the admin has made a deliberate decision to upgrade. In the case of people who simply aren't aware of the idea of oldstable->stable upgrades, I think it makes more sense to leave their systems as the originally-installed release indefinitely than it does to let them partially upgrade (or do an attempt at an upgrade with dist-upgrade). I think the chance that they'll figure out that the apt output they're seeing means that they need to go to www.debian.org, read the release notes, and then follow them carefully in order to upgrade their system, is quite small. Cheers.
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
