Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On 2006-09-16 10:00:12 -0500, John Hasler wrote: > Vincent Lefevre writes: > > And this can take months. Losing mail for months is not acceptable. > > Updates are available from proposed-updates. Also, these updates seem to be for the current stable version. And the maintainer didn't want to have

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On 2006-09-16 10:00:12 -0500, John Hasler wrote: > Updates are available from proposed-updates. I wonder why the Debian web pages don't mention it. -- Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Web: 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: Work:

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Andrei Popescu wrote: > This is the rule for stable. Grave bugs are fixed for the next update > though. Vincent Lefevre writes: > And this can take months. Losing mail for months is not acceptable. Updates are available from proposed-updates. -- John Hasler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On 2006-09-14 17:33:17 +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > This is the rule for stable. Grave bugs are fixed for the next update > though. And this can take months. Losing mail for months is not acceptable. > > There are other problems with Debian/stable, such as external > > software that can't be in

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Am 2006-09-13 11:03:27, schrieb Kim Christensen: > That's not the case anymore, there's only "testing" on these discs - at > least the last two releases. No, unstable is there too, but you must use the expert modus or set priority=low Thanks, Greetings and nice Day Michelle Konzack Sy

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2006-09-10 06:02:57 -0700, Marc Wilson wrote: > > That's a nonsense statement. Whether or not something is "up-to-date" > > has zero to do with whether or not it's more or less "buggy". > > Well, in the past, I had mail lost due to the spamassassin

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On 2006-09-10 06:02:57 -0700, Marc Wilson wrote: > That's a nonsense statement. Whether or not something is "up-to-date" > has zero to do with whether or not it's more or less "buggy". Well, in the past, I had mail lost due to the spamassassin from the stable distribution. The maintainer (or some

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Kim Christensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-09-11 01:20:58 +0200]: > > > Am 2006-09-09 01:30:50, schrieb Andrei Popescu: > > > > > "(Snapshots of the "testing" and "unstable" distributions are created > > > weekly.)" > > > > > > But I don't seem to

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

* Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-09-11 01:20:58 +0200]: > Am 2006-09-09 01:30:50, schrieb Andrei Popescu: > > > "(Snapshots of the "testing" and "unstable" distributions are created > > weekly.)" > > > > But I don't seem to be able to find them anywhere. > > If you go the CD link on

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Am 2006-09-09 01:30:50, schrieb Andrei Popescu: > > > "(Snapshots of the "testing" and "unstable" distributions are created > > weekly.)" > > > > But I don't seem to be able to find them anywhere. > > If you go the CD link on the Debian website, the

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Am 2006-09-09 01:30:50, schrieb Andrei Popescu: > "(Snapshots of the "testing" and "unstable" distributions are created > weekly.)" > > But I don't seem to be able to find them anywhere. If you go the CD link on the Debian website, there is a link, which let you go dirtectly to Testing... Note:

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Marc Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I will always maintain that people should be discouraged from using > unstable. I do agree. Especially the ones asking questions like the OP. Let's say I know my way around computers, maybe even linux and I've been running Debian stable, maybe even testing

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sunday 10 September 2006 14:57, Marc Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: > I will always maintain that people should be discouraged from using > unstable. Once I had installed and run Stable (upgrading from pre-Buzz through Hamm), I was

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Marc Wilson wrote: I will always maintain that people should be discouraged from using unstable. Seconded. If someone has to ask how to upgrade to unstable then they should not be using it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

I think it is becoming overstated. "Unstable" means changing, not the usual meaning that the software is unstable and thus unusable. I used to do things answering yes, yes, etc. Never really had a big problem with it. I now do a test run first and find out that stuff will be removed so skip the

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Johan Kullstam wrote: > This means that if a bug does enter testing, it can take a while for > the fix to arrive. If dependencies churn, it can sometimes take a > really long time for that fix to arrive. And did I mention that the > aging/dependencies is automatic? That's not completly accurate

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 04:45:24PM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > You can (always) use dist-upgrade, if you're careful enough > what the changes are. Oh, please. Your average cluebie passes "dist-upgrade -y" to apt-get, and then wonders what happened afterward. If he's *really* unclued, he does

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

"Jordi Carrillo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm using Debian testing and I was thinking about switching to unstable. Is > Debian unstable, stable enough for a Desktop system? Are there broken > dependencies in unstable? I run unstable/sid rather than testing.

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Marc Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 11:08:32AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > > Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > anymore updates. Also, dist-upgrade is not usually needed if you are > > > 'upgrading' within a version whereas 'dist-upgrade' is usally nee

[OT:] windows live cd [Was:] Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 11:12:30AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > > Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > reinstall the OS and any apps. INSANE! I know there exists a company > > > that makes a

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 11:08:32AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > anymore updates. Also, dist-upgrade is not usually needed if you are > > 'upgrading' within a version whereas 'dist-upgrade' is usally needed if > > you are moving to a differnt version (c

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 04:56:04PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote: > I've been using unstable for a few years, and haven't had any real > breakage. It may happen that some package no longer works for a few > days and it may be difficult to revert to the previous version, but > at least, one has up-to

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 11:12:30AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > reinstall the OS and any apps. INSANE! I know there exists a company > > that makes a live-cd based on windows which could be modified to pro

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Hello Andrei. >> reinstall the OS and any apps. INSANE! I know there exists a company >> that makes a live-cd based on windows which could be modified to provide > > AFAIK windows can't be used for a live-cd, as it requires write access > to the "root" partition. It can, look for Windows PE and

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > reinstall the OS and any apps. INSANE! I know there exists a company > that makes a live-cd based on windows which could be modified to provide AFAIK windows can't be used for a live-cd, as it requires write access to the "root" partition. Regards, Andrei

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Kevin Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > anymore updates. Also, dist-upgrade is not usually needed if you are > 'upgrading' within a version whereas 'dist-upgrade' is usally needed if > you are moving to a differnt version (cf. > stable->testing,stable->unstable, testing->unstable). > cheers, > Kev

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On Sat, Sep 09, 2006 at 11:12:23AM +0200, Jordi Carrillo wrote: > Testing cannot get very unstable as it wouldn't follow Debian rules. > Everything > that's in testing must be tested in unstable for some time. So, I don't think > being in testing will be such a mess in two months. Hi Jordi, yes it

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 11:32:44PM +0200, Jordi Carrillo wrote: > You say you reinstalled from zero twice. What's the best way to get into > unstable? Installing the stable version and then doing a dist-upgrade or > installing unstable right-away, I mean when debian installation asks you which > so

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 03:39:24PM -0400, Curt Howland wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Friday 08 September 2006 15:09, Andrei Popescu > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: > > If we are talking about unstable breakages I always remember the > > yaird issue (about

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On Saturday 09 September 2006 16:35, Ron Johnson wrote: > PD Dr.-Ing. C. Hurschler wrote: > > On Saturday 09 September 2006 14:23, John Hasler wrote: > >> Chris writes: > >>> I sometimes seriously wonder if the people who claim to have no > >>> breakage in unstable use their systems for anything ot

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Chris writes: > Do you print, do you burn CDs, do you transfer photos from your > camera? Yes. > If you do, and on top of that in KDE I said that I use neither KDE or Gnome. > If you do, and on top of that in KDE (gasp!), you will have had breakage > in the last six months on several occa

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 PD Dr.-Ing. C. Hurschler wrote: > On Saturday 09 September 2006 14:23, John Hasler wrote: >> Chris writes: >>> I sometimes seriously wonder if the people who claim to have no breakage >>> in unstable use their systems for anything other than a console

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On Saturday 09 September 2006 14:23, John Hasler wrote: > Chris writes: > > I sometimes seriously wonder if the people who claim to have no breakage > > in unstable use their systems for anything other than a console log in. > > I run Unstable on my workstation and have not had breakage for years.

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Miles Bader wrote: > Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [snip] > I've found that real problems are _extremely_ rare -- the recent xorg > upgrade is the only one that's bit me in ages and ages. Mostly the only > thing that goes wrong is packages that wo

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Saturday 09 September 2006 05:12, Jordi Carrillo was heard to say: > Testing cannot get very unstable as it wouldn't follow Debian > rules. Everything that's in testing must be tested in unstable for > some time. So, I don't think being in testing w

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thanks for saying that again. I sometimes seriously wonder if the > people who claim to have no breakage in unstable use their systems for > anything other than a console log in. I certainly do. I suppose it does depend on which packages you have installed, bu

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Chris writes: > I sometimes seriously wonder if the people who claim to have no breakage > in unstable use their systems for anything other than a console log in. I run Unstable on my workstation and have not had breakage for years. However, I do not blindly upgrade every day. I follow debian-dev

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Testing cannot get very unstable as it wouldn't follow Debian rules. Everything that's in testing must be tested in unstable for some time. So, I don't think being in testing will be such a mess in two months. On 9/9/06, Curt Howland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-Hash

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On Saturday 09 September 2006 04:54, Marc Wilson wrote: > On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 01:20:35PM +0200, Jordi Carrillo wrote: > > Is Debian unstable, stable enough for a Desktop system? > > If you have to ask, the answer is definately "no". Thanks for saying that again. I s

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 07:54:53PM -0700, Marc Wilson wrote: > On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 01:20:35PM +0200, Jordi Carrillo wrote: > > Is Debian unstable, stable enough for a Desktop system? > > If you have to ask, the answer is definately "no". > Agreed. However, IIRC,

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 01:20:35PM +0200, Jordi Carrillo wrote: > Is Debian unstable, stable enough for a Desktop system? If you have to ask, the answer is definately "no". -- Marc Wilson | Do not dry clean. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTE

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 08 September 2006 17:32, Jordi Carrillo was heard to say: > You say you reinstalled from zero twice. What's the best way to get > into unstable? Personally, I use the ~180MB CD version or CD#1 of whatever is Stable. I keep it to an absolute

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Kamaraju Kusumanchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Friday 08 September 2006 17:32, Jordi Carrillo wrote: > > You say you reinstalled from zero twice. What's the best way to get into > > unstable? Installing the stable version and then doing a dist-upgrade or > > installing unstable right-away, I

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

"Jordi Carrillo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You say you reinstalled from zero twice. What's the best way to get into > unstable? Installing the stable version and then doing a dist-upgrade or > installing unstable right-away, I mean when debian installation asks you > which sources to choose you

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Curt Howland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I didn't have as much > trouble as some with yaird, because I chanced to have a back-rev > kernel on the machine to boot into when I had the same problem you > did. I learned that the hard way :) Now I always have at least two kernel versions install

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On Friday 08 September 2006 17:32, Jordi Carrillo wrote: > You say you reinstalled from zero twice. What's the best way to get into > unstable? Installing the stable version and then doing a dist-upgrade or > installing unstable right-away, I mean when debian installation asks you > which sources t

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

You say you reinstalled from zero twice. What's the best way to get into unstable? Installing the stable version and then doing a dist-upgrade or installing unstable right-away, I mean when debian installation asks you which sources to choose you manually edit sources.list and put the unstable sen

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 08 September 2006 15:09, Andrei Popescu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: > If we are talking about unstable breakages I always remember the > yaird issue (about one year ago), which made my system unbootable. > This is how I learned to

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

I'll stay in testing. I've tried to move up to unstable and couldn't initiate the X server after the upgrade. Fortunately I had a backup of the whole system and got back to testing in a moment. As I see in http://packages.debian.org/testing and http://packages.debian.org/unstable there are no majo

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Albert Dengg wrote: > On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 01:20:35PM +0200, Jordi Carrillo wrote: > >> I'm using Debian testing and I was thinking about switching to > unstable. Is > >> Debian unstable, stable enough for a Desktop system? Are there broken > >> dependencie

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Jordi Carrillo writes: > You are forgetting the complicated dependency structure of Debian's > packages. When a new version of one of the big system components, like > Gnome, KDE or X enters unstable, it can take a few months for the > complete upgrade to propagate to testing. Thibaut Paumard writ

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Thibaut Paumard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Le vendredi 08 septembre 2006 à 13:20 +0200, Jordi Carrillo a écrit : > > I'm using Debian testing and I was thinking about switching to > > unstable. Is Debian unstable, stable enough for a Desktop system? Are > > there

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On 2006-09-08 14:39:34 +0200, Albert Dengg wrote: > one of the two machines running sarge at home does have some problems > (keeps muting the soundcard for some unknown reason)... > and last week a (security) update broke my system completly > (seems that the compute for some reason resartet right

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Jochen Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Another example of with quite annoying problems was the transition from > Xfree86 X.org. My keyboard layout had been changed from German to US and > X didn't start at all because it didn't find some fonts. If we are talking about unstable breakages I alw

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On 2006-09-08 13:58:15 +0200, Jochen Schulz wrote: > Jordi Carrillo: > > > > I'm using Debian testing and I was thinking about switching to > > unstable. Is Debian unstable, stable enough for a Desktop system? > > No, if you rely on your system to be available 100

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Thibaut Paumard wrote: > Le vendredi 08 septembre 2006 à 15:57 +0200, Jochen Schulz a écrit : >> Jordi Carrillo: >>> If packages go from unstable to testing in just 10 days then it's not worth >>> going to unstable, is it? I mean, you can live in the b

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Jordi Carrillo writes: > If packages go from unstable to testing in just 10 days then it's not > worth going to unstable, is it? I mean, you can live in the bleeding edge > as well being in testing. They only go across in ten days when all dependencies are satisfied, there are no serious bugs, and

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Le vendredi 08 septembre 2006 à 15:57 +0200, Jochen Schulz a écrit : > Jordi Carrillo: > > > > If packages go from unstable to testing in just 10 days then it's not worth > > going to unstable, is it? I mean, you can live in the bleeding edge as well > > being in testing. > > You are forgetting th

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 21:31:35 +1000, Albert Dengg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 01:20:35PM +0200, Jordi Carrillo wrote: I'm using Debian testing and I was thinking about switching to unstable. Is Debian unsta

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jochen Schulz wrote: > Ron Johnson: >> Jochen Schulz wrote: >>> Jordi Carrillo: >>> [snip] > Another example of with quite annoying problems was the transition from > Xfree86 X.org. My keyboard layout had been changed from German to US and > X didn't s

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Jordi Carrillo: > > If packages go from unstable to testing in just 10 days then it's not worth > going to unstable, is it? I mean, you can live in the bleeding edge as well > being in testing. You are forgetting the complicated dependency structure of Debian's packages. When a new version of one

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

done. On 9/8/2006, "CaT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 01:20:35PM +0200, Jordi Carrillo wrote: >> I'm using Debian testing and I was thinking about switching to unstable. Is >> Debian unstable, stable enough for a Desktop system? Are ther

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Ron Johnson: > Jochen Schulz wrote: > > Jordi Carrillo: > > > > No, if you rely on your system to be available 100% (time and function > > wise). No, if you don't (know how to) use the BTS, dpkg, apt, package > > documentation. If you don't know how to upgrade (and cannot find out > > except by ask

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Albert Dengg wrote: > On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 07:28:19AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: ... [snip] > so backups are _always_ a good idea and not a great problem > nowadays... harddisks are cheap and a simple cron script can > easyly create backups with

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 07:28:19AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: ... > > Yes if you have fun living on the edge. Yes, if you have enough time on > > your hands to fix a breakage now and then. > > But isn't Windows like that? I *know* that Mandrake "stabl

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

PPaauummaarrdd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > Le vendredi 08 septembre 2006 à 13:20 +0200, Jordi Carrillo a écrit : > > I'm using Debian testing and I was thinking about switching to > > unstable. Is Debian unstable, stable enough for a

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jochen Schulz wrote: > Jordi Carrillo: >> I'm using Debian testing and I was thinking about switching to unstable. Is >> Debian unstable, stable enough for a Desktop system? > > No, if you rely on your system to be availab

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

crit :> I'm using Debian testing and I was thinking about switching to> unstable. Is Debian unstable, stable enough for a Desktop system? Are > there broken dependencies in unstable?> ThanksI can't really see a rationale for this. As far as I know, packagesnormally migrate from

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Le vendredi 08 septembre 2006 à 13:20 +0200, Jordi Carrillo a écrit : > I'm using Debian testing and I was thinking about switching to > unstable. Is Debian unstable, stable enough for a Desktop system? Are > there broken dependencies in unstable? > Thanks I can't really se

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 01:36:26PM +0200, Jordi Carrillo wrote: > Well, I'll dist-upgrade to unstable as it seems there are no problems > despite its name . Is gnome 2.16 there? it seems not (i haven't used gnome for a while). and please, reply to lis

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

Jordi Carrillo: > > I'm using Debian testing and I was thinking about switching to unstable. Is > Debian unstable, stable enough for a Desktop system? No, if you rely on your system to be available 100% (time and function wise). No, if you don't (know how to) use the BTS,

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 01:20:35PM +0200, Jordi Carrillo wrote: > I'm using Debian testing and I was thinking about switching to unstable. Is > Debian unstable, stable enough for a Desktop system? Are there broken > dependencies in

Re: debian unstable, stable enough?

On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 01:20:35PM +0200, Jordi Carrillo wrote: > I'm using Debian testing and I was thinking about switching to unstable. Is > Debian unstable, stable enough for a Desktop system? Are there broken > dependencies in unstable? There might not be today but there may

debian unstable, stable enough?

I'm using Debian testing and I was thinking about switching to unstable. Is Debian unstable, stable enough for a Desktop system? Are there broken dependencies in unstable?Thanks