Craig, you're making my brain hurt! On Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 08:49:17PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote > On Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 09:46:13AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 01:22:12PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote: > > > debian 'unstable' is perfectly usable for production servers, using > > > it for such does not require any more caution about upgrades than > > > using debian 'stable' or debian 'frozen'. > > > > Like during the Perl transition period, or when a recent libstdc++ > > broke apt, or when su stopped being able to su, or when .... > > > > Need I continue? > > i repeat: "[using unstable] does not require any more caution about > upgrades than [using stable]" > > upgrading to whatever the latest stable releases is requires just > as much caution/paranoia as upgrading to whatever is in the latest > unstable. anyone who trusts the latest debian stable release on their > critical/production servers without testing it on other machines first > deserves whatever they get. >
So, you verify that everything is likely to work properly before installing it on your production servers. So, you aren't going to get burned by a broken libc, libpam or whatever from unstable. So, you have no need of unfettered access to the poorly-audited packages in incoming from a local mirror. So, you're making my brain hurt. Waah! John P. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mdt.net.au/~john Debian Linux admin & support:technical services