On Monday 21 June 2004 22:00, Chris Metcalf wrote: > If I remember correctly, "unstable" is called "unstable" because the > packages go through a large amount of turnover and you'll usually have > to upgrade a few times per week to keep your system in sync.
Now that's interesting. The name "unstable" put me off using it. > In my experience, "unstable" is actually very stable for my desktop > uses. I'll consider switching from testing to unstable now. > And its a whole lot easier to keep up-to-date than RPM based > distros. I wholeheartedly agree, although I have seen comments from fans of RPM-distros that we Debian users say that because we don't know how to use urpmi properly. -- Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]