On 11 Jun 2004, Clive Menzies wrote:
On (11/06/04 07:29), Adam Funk wrote:
I've been using Debian testing on my home workstation for a while now and am generally happy with it, but I understand there are some disadvantages in comparison with unstable, such as recency of security updates. I suppose the name "unstable" puts me off, since I work from home a lot and need a functional computer all the time. What would be the positive and negative effects of switching to unstable?
Hi Adam
There was an extensive thread on this subject a while ago which pretty much covered all the arguments sid v sarge with input from some of the most knowledgeable people on the list:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2004/04/msg10262.htm
Regards
Clive
Following that discussion I took the plunge and started following unstable instead of testing. This was a couple of months ago now, I think; nothing terrible has happened (yet!).
Anthony
I'm a non-technical user, about 6 months on Linux, and very happy with debian unstable. It's been very stable, so far.
If you're running i386 architecture packages, remember much of the development happens here first. So you're that much more "stable," in effect. Delays that may keep a package from Testing may be for problems on a different platform.
Regards.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
