On Sun, 3 May 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, 3 May 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > What is the real story with debian 2.0? IE when ill it be
> > released? I have a 1.2 system that I want to upgrade, but I need it
> > to be dependable, so I am waiting for the final release.
>
> From what you just said, you question would better be worded: When
> will 2.x be reasonably stable for a non-experimental user? As a
> non-developer, let me give you my best estimate:
>
> Never.
this is garbage.
hamm works. and it works a lot better than RH5 does....in fact, it was
a lot more stable than RH5 even back in December when RH5 was released
(IMO, hamm has been 'safe enough' for non-developers since around Nov
last year - 90% of the work takes the first 90% of the time...the
remaining 10% of the work takes the remaining 90% of the time :).
if you're impatient, upgrade via ftp or buy an unofficial 'hamm' CD,
there are several people who burn them. use my autoup.sh script to do
the first stage of the upgrade....there are a few packages which have to
be upgraded in a precise order otherwise bash could break. there won't
be that much difference between hamm now and hamm when it finally gets
released - most of the differences will only be relevant to first-time
installations, not upgrades.
you can find the autoup.sh script and a .tar.gz file containing all the
packages it needs at:
http://debian.vicnet.net.au/autoup/
or
ftp://debian.vicnet.net.au/autoup/
a lot of users (note, users not only developers) have done this already
and are very happy with the results.
yes, there are a few bugs. there will *always* be bugs. none are
show-stoppers at the moment. even pre-release hamm is much better than
*released* versions of other dists.
> History will probably repeat itself and the project will go
> even further away from this planet. Rather than focus on building a
> 2.0.x release that kicks ass, they will concentrate on playing with
> new toys.
the long time to debian 2.0 is actually a deviation from previous
history - *caused* by the fact that we are switching to libc6. in
the past, anyone could safely install a few 'unstable' packages on a
'stable' system.
this time around, that has *not* been possible: if you want one package
from hamm then you have to do a complete upgrade to hamm....it's all or
nothing.
once we get hamm out the door, then we'll be back to where we used to
be: upgrading individual packages from 'unstable' will be safe.
craig
--
craig sanders
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
