-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 07/27/07 12:26, Tim Hull wrote: > I'm currently trying out both Debian and Ubuntu on my MacBook to see which > one I prefer. > Right now, I'm currently liking Debian better - the stability seems better, > and it seems easier to customize > - but I need to run software that's newer than what's in etch (not for a > lust for bleeding-edge, but simply for the reason > that my MacBook won't suspend or do proper power management in any kernel > older than 2.6.22). I also want to be > able to get updated packages such as the newest Firefox...er..Iceweasel > (still hate that name, would prefer something > less silly). > > I know the easy Debian solution is to run testing/unstable - it seems like > most people do. However, then you lose the advantage of > stability. I actually tried testing and unstable, but found a critical bug > pertaining to my video card - my system likes to reboot on suspend with the > new Xorg drivers (yes, dutifully reported it to BTS). For this reason, I > figure I'll confine Lenny/Sid to a VM or chroot, and I've been looking into > backports. However, backports.org doesn't seem to have what I need (it only > has 2.6.21 kernel, doesn't have the new acpi-support, not to mention some > extra gstreamer plugins I wanted). What would be the ideal solution for > me? Is there a reliable way to roll my own backports using apt to pull in > dependencies? Can I build from Sid sources on an as-needed basis? I've > come across a tool called "apt-build" which pulls down dependencies and > builds from source - is it what I need? What should I put in my sources.list > ?
deb-src ftp://mirrors.kernel.org/debian unstable main \ contrib non-free > On a side note, I will say that the one area I think FOSS lags behind > Windows and Mac is in updating individual system components. I LIKE being > able to update a few things without hackish solutions (i.e. build from > source tarballs) or updating my whole system. You can do it easily on > Mac/Windows, but it's quite difficult and unreliable on nearly every > distribution. This is the price you pay for Freedom. > I think Debian really ought to look into making backports an > official project and integrating it into the stable release as a way to get > updates on an as-needed basis. It may even be an interesting idea to do > point releases of stable with some backports included. Has this ever been > discussed? It seems a lot better than simply speeding up the release > cycle... That would be the "volatile" branch. Since I run unstable, I have no need for it, but Google might have some answers. If not, ask debian-devel. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGqkAuS9HxQb37XmcRAu9KAJ9vEvVaXIxqbZObqdcvDk8mIfSmZQCgp5lD jmQo3qhkviG+sgWTmdxP2rg= =VFvX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
