i run potato with glib6-2.1.1 and kernel 2.2.7. and i have no problems to speak of, although i did with the first release of potato. i also haven't noticed any significant problems with any packages. if you want an opinion, here's mine: my system is much faster, more useful, and just as stable now as it was when i was using slink. in fact, i daresay i have LESS problems with it since i can do what i want to do without having to upgrade a zillion things to accomplish this.
cheers! --add --------------- I got sucked into /dev/null ---------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: Sean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <debian-user@lists.debian.org> Cc: Debian List <debian-user@lists.debian.org> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 1999 11:07 AM Subject: Re: libc6-2.1.1 ... safe to install? > This kind of strikes at something I've been wondering of late. Slink, > back when Hamm was the stable dist, was pretty stable I thought. I > realize that Potato started out hideously broken, mostly because of the > libc6 2.1.1, but that was a while back, and I'm now wondering if anyone > has any comments on how "stable" the unstable distribution is in > general. > > Sean > > > J Horacio MG wrote: > > > > ~> > I have some packages which require version 2.1.1 from libc6 (which I > > ~> > expect it can be found in potato). My question is, do I have to expect > > ~> > any problems if I install it in slink, or is it just as straight forward > > ~> > as upgrading any other package? > > ~> > > ~> If you upgrade a slink installation to libc6 2.1.1, you will probably have > > ~> some problems. I know I did, and I went back to libc6 2.07 > > ~> > > ~> I suppose you could upgrade to potato and avoid the problems. > > ~> > > ~> If you try it on a slink system, do not go back from the potato version of > > ~> ld.so to the slink version or you will break the system; I just kept the newer > > ~> ld.so when I went back to the older libc6. > > > > That sounds as if upgrading to libc6 2.1.1 is not a good idea, at least > > not if it's just for a couple of packages. But, does it mean libc6 > > 2.1.1 is not stable, or it means it's stable but not fit to use with a > > system packed with (and for) a previous version? > > > > If I finally decided to do an upgrade, which other packages/libraries > > should I also upgrade for sanity sake? > > > > TIA > > > > Horacio > > > > -- > > Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null > > -- > He who hesitates is last. > > > -- > Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null > >
