Re: 2.0 Beta Party...
On Wed, Jun 24, 1998 at 12:19:45PM -0600, Rick Macdonald wrote: > Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > > > We already *did* get rid of most of the bugs, otherwise we wouldn't even > > release a beta. The point is that we think it is quite stable now, and can > > be recommended to users who can't wait any day longer. > > Here's a question for you. I'm running 1.3r8. I ran off the unstable > tree for a long long time until the libc6 stuff started, then I held > back. > > Now that hamm is ready to go, isn't the current unstable even better for > people who normally feel the unstable tree is OK for them? Why? Slink is mainly identical to hamm, the only differences is C++ development, apt, lintian, cruft, a few other packages. Well, there are two things one should keep in mind: 1) An upgrade to hamm is a complete upgrade of at least the base system. Better you upgrade all installed packages, to get a clean libc6 system. This means, it is hard to *revert* the upgrade. 2) An upgrade to slink can be incremental. One package, two packages, downgrading the other one that is not working to the version in hamm again, all of this without a problem (there are exceptions, though). This means, once you are in the hamm world, slink can be used like bo could be used on a rexx system. The current unstable (=slink) is probably buggy because not well tested (probably not tested at all). However, this is Debian: You have the freedom and possibility to choose everything between cutting edge and rock stable. Marcus -- "Rhubarb is no Egyptian god."Debian GNU/Linuxfinger brinkmd@ Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.orgmaster.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]for public PGP Key http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2.0 Beta Party...
Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > We already *did* get rid of most of the bugs, otherwise we wouldn't even > release a beta. The point is that we think it is quite stable now, and can > be recommended to users who can't wait any day longer. Here's a question for you. I'm running 1.3r8. I ran off the unstable tree for a long long time until the libc6 stuff started, then I held back. Now that hamm is ready to go, isn't the current unstable even better for people who normally feel the unstable tree is OK for them? -- ...RickM... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2.0 Beta Party...
On Tue, Jun 23, 1998 at 02:45:21PM +, Jay Barbee wrote: > I heard about the Debian 2.0-beta IRC party on slashdot.org... I was > wondering > at what stage is this debian group going to create the "Official CD" for 2.0? > > Will 2.0-beta be included? I would love a Hamm CD ASAP! And how does its > frozen state differ from being beta software. After all, both are getting > rid of > bugs... We already *did* get rid of most of the bugs, otherwise we wouldn't even release a beta. The point is that we think it is quite stable now, and can be recommended to users who can't wait any day longer. It is also a good phase for "minor things" like install documentation, ftp site, cd rom images etc to become tested. Marcus -- "Rhubarb is no Egyptian god."Debian GNU/Linuxfinger brinkmd@ Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.orgmaster.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]for public PGP Key http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2.0 Beta Party...
I heard about the Debian 2.0-beta IRC party on slashdot.org... I was wondering at what stage is this debian group going to create the "Official CD" for 2.0? Will 2.0-beta be included? I would love a Hamm CD ASAP! And how does its frozen state differ from being beta software. After all, both are getting rid of bugs... I can't wait for 2.0! --Jay -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
