Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #183264

Re: Relative stability of Testing vs Unstable

Show all headers | View raw

On 07/05/2017 07:24 PM, John Hasler wrote:
> Jimmy Johnson writes:
>>  From what I read, very serious bugs are likely to be caught before
>> making it to Testing, while Unstable benefits from getting security
>> updates (in the form of new upstream releases) sooner, and is more
>> likely to be consistent during transitions.

I've read that before someplace, but I did not write it.  But I tend to 
agree, also packages are suppose to be working in theory before going to 
Sid, just not yet tested, sometimes a package will be downgraded and 
that obsolete package may not be so obsolete after all, if you're not 
paying attention you can screw a system up and the same thing can happen 
in testing too.

> Unstable is not required to be consistent at all.
> 
> That said, I've always used it on my desktop and have not had a problem
> for at least ten years.  However, I use FVWM rather than a desktop
> environment.

Me too. :)

This Sid system is more than 15yrs old, has seen many releases, three 
different hard drives and at lest 5 different desktop computers, intel, 
ati and nvidia too. However, I use KDE, always have, I've used other 
environments and I could get used to the idea of right clicking on my 
desktop and finding what I want.

Cheers,
-- 
Jimmy Johnson

Debian Sid/Testing - KDE Plasma 5.8.7 - Linux 4.9 - EXT4 at sda15
Registered Linux User #380263

Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Relative stability of Testing vs Unstable Jason Cohen <jwittlincohen@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 02:20 +0200
  Re: Relative stability of Testing vs Unstable Bob Weber <bobrweber@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 03:40 +0200
  Re: Relative stability of Testing vs Unstable Jimmy Johnson <field.engineer@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 04:10 +0200
    Re: Relative stability of Testing vs Unstable John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2017-07-06 04:30 +0200
      Re: Relative stability of Testing vs Unstable Jimmy Johnson <field.engineer@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 05:40 +0200
      Re: Relative stability of Testing vs Unstable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-07-06 10:10 +0200
        Re: Relative stability of Testing vs Unstable Fungi4All <fungilife@protonmail.com> - 2017-07-06 10:40 +0200
        Re: Relative stability of Testing vs Unstable John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2017-07-06 14:00 +0200
          Re: Relative stability of Testing vs Unstable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-07-06 14:30 +0200
  Re: Relative stability of Testing vs Unstable Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-07-06 06:00 +0200
    Re: Relative stability of Testing vs Unstable John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2017-07-06 13:50 +0200
  Re: Relative stability of Testing vs Unstable songbird <songbird@anthive.com> - 2017-07-06 13:50 +0200
    Re: Relative stability of Testing vs Unstable John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2017-07-06 14:10 +0200
      Re: Relative stability of Testing vs Unstable songbird <songbird@anthive.com> - 2017-07-06 23:00 +0200
        Re: Relative stability of Testing vs Unstable Fungi4All <fungilife@protonmail.com> - 2017-07-07 19:20 +0200

csiph-web