On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 07:39:19PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: > on Fri, Apr 16, 2004 at 09:26:53AM -0700, Robin Lynn Frank ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > ... > > > > 1) What are debian's strong and weak points as a server? > > 2) What are debian's strong and weak points as a desktop workstation? > > The "Why Debian Rocks" patge at TWikIWeThey, which I administer, has > already been mentioned. Manoj Srivastava (Debian Project Secretary) > also has a very good page up on the topic (referenced above IIRC). > > Basic benefits: > > ... > > - Choice of stability / currency tradeoff points with different Debian > releases: stable (old but rock solid), testing (equivalent to most > other distro's current release), ...
This statement seems at odds with recent list discussions of the nature of testing, which point out that testing may break for various reasons and is slow to get security updates. > ... unstable (usually works, but watch > the release notes / upgrade lists), experimental (unofficial, *will* > stab you in the face, given the opportunity. My basic > recommendation is 'stable' for servers, 'testing' for workstations, Is this still your recommendation? I've used testing in the past for workstations, but from the recent discussions thought that unstable would be the preferred choice when stable won't cut it. > until you understand packaging tools. After which point you want to > look at pinning. I'll have to look into pinning. I prefer running stable, but want some packages not available there. Ken -- Ken Irving, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
