In several mails you claimed testing as broken. This is completely
orthognal to my experience. I'm using testing since its existence
on most of my boxes.
I use it on some boxes too, however, mostly the snapshots from the
half-year before-stable period of time. Attempts to use much sooner
snapshots were not too successfull for me.
Only production servers are running stable and
I keep my fingers from running unstable (except of chroots). So
were is the proof for you statement. What are the numbers of the
bugs you might have reported against packages in testing?
Don't remember, not too much. However, if hundred of packages had broken
deps, where would You report the bug? I'm not too experienced with apt
and I hate hacking around it.
Another hand, many problems were well-known by the time I met them,
there wasn't need to report them again.
I'd say, half of problems with testing were connected to bugs in
installer. I know the guys are doing though work around it, however I
think installer should get stabilised a while before the testing gets
into feature freeze. Etch has been quite better by this means than Sarge
btw.
Could you
please a bit more verbose about your problems in testing because
nobody else made it to my radar that testing is that unusable.
Perhaps I missed something ...
I heared many people on mailing lists saying they would never suggest
running testing for other than testing purposes, and they often added
typical problems one coan get in with testing..
However, problems with testing are matter of other topic, an't they? ;-)
Best regards
Peter
Kind regards
Andreas (writing from a laptop that runs testing. ;-))
--
Odchádzajúca správa neobsahuje vírusy, nepou¾ívam Windows.
=======================
Mgr. Peter Tuhársky
Referát informatiky
Mesto Banská Bystrica
ÈSA 26
975 39 Banská Bystrica
Tel: +421 48 4330 118
Fax: +421 48 411 3575
=======================
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
