On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 8:05 PM, John Hasler <jhas...@newsguy.com> wrote: > Stephen Allen writes: >> That was what I thought the purpose of volatile was. > > It isn't. See <http://www.debian.org/volatile/> . You want backports: > <http://backports-master.debian.org/>
No, while that meets the need, I don't think that's what they want. The posters agreeing with each other (and I agree with them) are looking for something "official." For example, RHEL, while being even "more" stable than Debian (they support it for a decade instead of 2.5 years), keeps the important *desktop* applications (Firefox, OpenOffice) reasonably up to date and working (e.g.; Pidgin) when they break due to circumstances outside of their control (in the case of Pidgin, Yahoo! changed their chat protocol. Debian left it broken in Etch -- RHEL fixed it). I do agree with the others that this policy of never updating *for any reason, even reasonable reasons* is quite a millstone around Debian's neck. It's ironic that out of all the major Linux distributions, only RHEL takes (IMO) a sensible middle ground, a balance between stability and unusability. -- Chris -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAOEVnYt+9Q9=aupifhymaez0txvgcwu90c21ojafymvofl_...@mail.gmail.com
