Re: backports vs testing (etch)

On 2/24/06, Roberto C. Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you follow their recommendation and pin the backports sources to a > very low priority, then you should be OK. As far as upgrading, it will > not be officially supported to upgrade from Sarge+backports to Etch > (once Etch goes stable

Re: backports vs testing (etch)

On 2/24/06, Roberto C. Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > To begin with, backports.org is designed to allow the user/admin to > stick with a proven and stable system, but upgrade small parts of it to > newer releases that are built to run on the older libraries available in > stable. For exampl

Re: backports vs testing (etch)

L.V.Gandhi wrote: > On 2/24/06, Roberto C. Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>To begin with, backports.org is designed to allow the user/admin to >>stick with a proven and stable system, but upgrade small parts of it to >>newer releases that are built to run on the older libraries available

Re: backports vs testing (etch)

Martin Paraskevov wrote: > I am confused as to why backports.org exists. If > I want to use the latest software, > should I use backports.org or I should upgrade to > etch (I am currently using sarge). > What happens if I use backports for some time and

backports vs testing (etch)

I am confused as to why backports.org exists. If I want to use the latest software, should I use backports.org or I should upgrade to etch (I am currently using sarge). What happens if I use backports for some time and then decide to upgrade to etch. Will I end up with a broken system? What is the