On Tue, 8 Jan 2002 15:00:39 +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: >On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 03:15:00AM +0000, Nick wrote:
>> Can Chris or anyone else who Understands please give a corresponding >> comment about testing ? I believe the standard wisdom is that >> testing KDE has been less useful than unstable KDE (though I don't >> understand why), and I'm just wondering whether that will now change. > >I suggest using the packages from unstable. Migration to testing isn't >automatic, and KDE packages are being held back due to problems with >libstdc++3 and such on hppa and arm. Thus the packages are older, such >as kdenetwork, which is still lacking IMAP support in woody ... Many thanks for the advice, and for the explanation for why unstable might have more promising KDE content than testing. I note your comment in a later thread ("Fresh install of kde from woody") that I suggest you do the following: * Install woody from scratch. This works fine. * Wait 5 days. * Install KDE from testing - you'll now have *working* KDE 2.2.2. and I take it you mean in this case that although the resulting KDE 2.2.2 will be working, it may be lacking some features that haven't made it through from unstable (yet). I guess the sensible thing to do might be (a) install KDE from testing, and then (b) update that KDE to the unstable version if desired things are missing - picking a good "unstable moment" if at all possible :) I'll have a go. Cheers, Nick Boyce Bristol, UK -- Special Relativity: The person in the other queue thinks yours is moving faster.