> Neo-fandangled-SuperVision2000 video card which is not supported in > Debian Slink, so they opt to use RedHat 6.1 instead. This kind of thing > is increasinly giving the public the impression that Linux is indeed > forking and that "RedHat is better because it supports more hardware > than Debian". They don't care that you can just point apt to > ftp.netgod.net/x and get the latest X server. The need to upgrade is > often hardware based, not "gotta be bleeding edge" based.
This IMHO is problem of marketing Debs - of people like us who support Debs making the public aware of just how good Debs is and how easy to upgrade. > Then there is the situation where you want a certain program, but the > program developer provides only debian packages linked against potato > libraries. What if this program is needed for the system to "do what is > required"? I encountered this situation myself, but since I didn't want > to subject myself to a lengthy upgrade process, I didn't bother with the > program. You might ask "So why didn't the developer compile Slink deb's > as well?". Good question. I suspect that developers like to have the > latest libraries etc as well, which explains why this particular one was > using potato. I agree - but surely the best solution is for more people to become Debian developers and help the effort? And if not developers, then help in some other way - donations, for example. Other distributions can afford full-time staff to work on stuff. > That's the thing, I'm not just talking about "unnecessary" upgrades. > There are situations where it doesn't matter too much about the latest > stuff, such as if you are running a web site or a samba server. But > there are situations where upgrading is a necessity. > Again, given the nature of Debian - a volunteer effort - it is understandable that things take time. And this is one of Debs great strengths - things are not rushed just to get a new version out. Time and effort are taken to try to get things right when a new version is released.
