On Thursday 13 April 2006 07:36, ?รก?ek Kry?tof wrote: > I agree, but only partially. > > look - STABLE is too outdated for desktop, TESTING is often broken more > than unstable (mainly missing dependancies or completely missing apps (e.g. > K3b was absent from testing for many months!)). SID appears to be the best > choice for Debian desktop (regardless to what official policy states) and > as such it is chosen by many.
It does not matter what your reasons for running unstable are. But unstable is what it is - unstable. Problems like these always come up. If you are not happy with problems arising due to the nature of unstable, please use Stable. period. Just because someone is running unstable for 1 year without any problems, does not guarantee that it will not have any problems in the next year. Problems can arise on ANY given day. Finally, to all those people, who keep referring unstable for newbies - situations like this should be kept in mind. raju -- http://kamaraju.googlepages.com/cornell-bazaar http://groups.google.com/group/cornell-bazaar/about
