On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 01:18:27PM -0600, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 02:04:48PM -0500, stan wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 05:02:10PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> >
> > > That's a hopeless exaggeration; I run stable happily on my home server.
> > > Anyway, if you run testing you need to manage the security yourself by
> > > backporting patches. I don't believe anyone will ever have told you
> > > otherwise.
> > >
> > > (It's not an ideal situation, true. However, it's reality.)
> >
> > Not idael at all. As a matter of fact, it makes the whole concept of a
> > testing release pretty useless.
>
> How does a lack of security update support make the "testing" release
> useless? IIRC, the purpose of the testing release was to ensure that
> pacakges interoperated properly help prepare for the next stable
> release. In other words it's for testing. That seems pretty clear to
> me that it's not intended for production use.
>
> Per the Debian releases page:
>
> The ``testing'' distribution contains packages that haven't been
> accepted into a ``stable'' release yet, but they are in the queue for
> that. The main advantage of using this distribution is that it has more
> recent versions of software, and the main disadvantage is that it's not
> completely tested and has no official support from Debian security team.
>
> > So, we have a pretty "stable" release good enough "IMHO" for "real
> > production" work. But we choose to cripple it by not providing security
> > updtaes?
>
> You make it sound like it was "taken" away. TMK, it's never been there.
>
> > Sounds like bad allocation of resources to me!
>
> Testing is almost always a moving target. Stable on the other hand is
> not. Ideally, at some point security support for testing would be a
> good thing to have. However, I'd hardly call the lack of security
> support for it to be "bad allocation of resources".
>
Moving target or not, I think 200+ day uptimes ina 24x7 production
environment say something about teh :stability" of the testing release.
Therfore it appears to me to be the best choice for a production machine,
assumng that you need anything like current software packages (such as perl
modules). Therefore it _should_ be scure!
--
"They that would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve
neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
