Re: testing security updates
On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 08:45:27 -0400 Greg Wooledge wrote: Hello Greg, >Yeah, I gave the (overly) simplified set of warnings. I'm sure we can all come up with so many different scenarios that this could run and run if we let it. Suffice to say, there are always exceptions that prove the rule. Like I said (you already know this); If you break your install, you get to keep all the pieces. Finally: Mixing different variants (stable, testing, unstable, etc.) is not something I undertake lightly. So far, it's only firefox that's from unstable. The rest is testing - your comment "if it's 1% unstable, it's still unstable" notwithstanding. Apologies if I misquoted that. -- Regards _ / ) "The blindingly obvious is / _)radnever immediately apparent" This is the fifty first state of the USA Heartland - The The pgpuyDu1acvcc.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: testing security updates
On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 10:52:16AM +0100, Brad Rogers wrote: > Also, currently, digikam is not in testing. No big deal, I have it > installed and working. *However* if I had just installed testing, I > would get digikam from stable, because I use it daily, and can't do > certain things without it. Yeah, I gave the (overly) simplified set of warnings. You can't "run stable but cherry-pick from testing". A lot of people want to do that. It cannot be done safely, at least not by someone who isn't an expert. (Use backports instead!) But you *can* run testing and cherry-pick from stable (sometimes). Or, you can run stable and cherry-pick from oldstable (sometimes). It requires some knowledge and carries some risk. It's mostly a matter of understanding that you are running the *newest* of whichever set of branches you mix. If you have some packages from stable, and some packages from unstable, you are running unstable. It doesn't matter whether it's 99% stable, or 1% stable -- it's still really unstable. You need to see it that way, or you are screwed. For *most* users, running stable, or running stable plus selected backports, is the correct choice.
Re: testing security updates
Greg Wooledge wrote: > YOU DO NOT MIX TESTING WITH UNSTABLE. > If you use one of these, you use that one only. No mixing. > No Frankendebians. But you *can* mix Unstable with Testing. (Not the order here.) Normally no package from Testing will get pulled in, but sometimes this is the only way to install some packages during transitions of not every package in the chain has been rebuild (correctly). Grüße, Sven. -- Sigmentation fault. Core dumped.
Re: testing security updates
Hi, Brad Rogers wrote: > > > If one uses sites such as spotify or amazon video to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > >...but why on earth would you want to do THAT? Eeeek... ;-) Brad Rogers wrote: > *I* don't; It's the kids. I wonder whether there is a Debian Developer willing to create a package which installs the Greta-at-UN video or sound track as start-up message of such programs: "How Dare You !" Have a nice day :) Thomas
Re: testing security updates
On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 12:14:00 +0200 wrote: Hello to...@tuxteam.de, >...but why on earth would you want to do THAT? Eeeek... ;-) *I* don't; It's the kids. Honest. :-) -- Regards _ / ) "The blindingly obvious is / _)radnever immediately apparent" Where will you be when the bodies burn? The Gasman Cometh - Crass pgpEYNLs0B5Ac.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: testing security updates
On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 10:52:16AM +0100, Brad Rogers wrote: > On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 15:40:53 -0400 > Greg Wooledge wrote: > > Hello Greg, > > >YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH TESTING. > > > >YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH UNSTABLE. > > > >YOU DO NOT MIX TESTING WITH UNSTABLE. > > By and large, I agree. > > I would add a few caveats, though. Yeah, I "caved", too... > If one uses sites such as spotify or amazon video [...] ...but why on earth would you want to do THAT? Eeeek... ;-) Cheers (tongue-in-cheek, really) -- t signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: testing security updates
On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 15:40:53 -0400 Greg Wooledge wrote: Hello Greg, >YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH TESTING. > >YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH UNSTABLE. > >YOU DO NOT MIX TESTING WITH UNSTABLE. By and large, I agree. I would add a few caveats, though. If one uses sites such as spotify or amazon video, one has, on occasion, to install a version of firefox(1) from unstable because those two companies insist on supporting only a small number of versions of the browser. As such, after a while, the version of ff in testing sometimes becomes 'too old', necessitating another update. TBH, I'd prefer not to do this, but my kids use both spotify & amazon video. And for a quiet(er) life... Also, currently, digikam is not in testing. No big deal, I have it installed and working. *However* if I had just installed testing, I would get digikam from stable, because I use it daily, and can't do certain things without it. Also, as Tomas says, if you know the pro's and con's, you can mix and match. Of course, if stuff breaks, then you get to keep the pieces. (1) I could use a version direct from mozilla, but I prefer to avoid that. -- Regards _ / ) "The blindingly obvious is / _)radnever immediately apparent" Age of destruction, age of oblivion Neuromancer - Billy Idol pgp6_e3TkSBvl.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: testing security updates
On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 03:40:53PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: [...] > YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH TESTING. > > YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH UNSTABLE. > > YOU DO NOT MIX TESTING WITH UNSTABLE. Wow. I'd rather say: you do not "do not". Know the downsides, know what can break, and then, when it's appropriate, by all means, mix whatever you want to mix. That said (and this comes as a small paradox), stable usually mixes better with unstable than with testing. I've been using a Frankendebian happily for ~3/4 year as my main work machine. Be sure you know what you're into. Be prepared to fiddle with apt. Cheers -- t signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: testing security updates
On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 15:40:53 -0400 Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 08:35:32PM +0100, mick crane wrote: > > Debian web page about testing is saying that testing gets infrequent > > security updates > > It's more accurate to say that testing does not get ANY security > updates. Not in any realistic sense. Packages migrate from unstable > into testing, and if one of those packages happens to fix a security > bug, it's a happy accident. > > The only thing that even comes *close* to "security updates in > testing" is the fact that unstable packages that are marked as high > priority have a shorter delay before being automatically copied into > testing. > > Several years ago, there was an attempt to set up a "security for > testing" repository, but that died out and hasn't been used in years. > > > and that you can get more frequent security updates from > > unstable. > > Which means some people choose to run unstable rather than choosing > to run testing. It's their choice. > > > Is that what people do ? > > have buster for main and bullseye for security updates in > > sources.list ? > > YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH TESTING. > > YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH UNSTABLE. > > YOU DO NOT MIX TESTING WITH UNSTABLE. > > If you use one of these, you use that one only. No mixing. > No Frankendebians. > > https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian > But the boot-up banner for unstable always contains the distribution name "/sid" and always includes testing in the sources.list along with unstable. This is where stable is minimally installed then immediately upgraded directly to unstable, which is how I do it. I've never installed testing, or upgraded to it, or placed it deliberately in sources.list. -- Joe
Re: testing security updates
On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 08:54:37PM +0100, mick crane wrote: > yes sorry, I realized I made an error and should have typed > bullseye for main and unstable for security updates just after pressing > send. > but you say not to do that ? Correct. If you want to run unstable, just run unstable.
Re: testing security updates
On 2019-10-03 20:40, Greg Wooledge wrote: YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH TESTING. YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH UNSTABLE. YOU DO NOT MIX TESTING WITH UNSTABLE. If you use one of these, you use that one only. No mixing. No Frankendebians. https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian yes sorry, I realized I made an error and should have typed bullseye for main and unstable for security updates just after pressing send. but you say not to do that ? mick -- Key ID4BFEBB31
Re: testing security updates
On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 08:35:32PM +0100, mick crane wrote: > Debian web page about testing is saying that testing gets infrequent > security updates It's more accurate to say that testing does not get ANY security updates. Not in any realistic sense. Packages migrate from unstable into testing, and if one of those packages happens to fix a security bug, it's a happy accident. The only thing that even comes *close* to "security updates in testing" is the fact that unstable packages that are marked as high priority have a shorter delay before being automatically copied into testing. Several years ago, there was an attempt to set up a "security for testing" repository, but that died out and hasn't been used in years. > and that you can get more frequent security updates from > unstable. Which means some people choose to run unstable rather than choosing to run testing. It's their choice. > Is that what people do ? > have buster for main and bullseye for security updates in sources.list ? YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH TESTING. YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH UNSTABLE. YOU DO NOT MIX TESTING WITH UNSTABLE. If you use one of these, you use that one only. No mixing. No Frankendebians. https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian
testing security updates
I didn't type previous correctly did I. that would be bullseye for main and unstable for security updates in sources.lists. Is that what people do ? mick -- Key ID4BFEBB31
testing security updates
hello, Debian web page about testing is saying that testing gets infrequent security updates and that you can get more frequent security updates from unstable. Is that what people do ? have buster for main and bullseye for security updates in sources.list ? mick -- Key ID4BFEBB31
