Roman Stepanyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Cool! well, since I'm new to debian, for now I would rather have an old >> stable version than to have to put up with 'unstablelessness'. > > I think you did NOT get it. UNSTABLE branch of Debian does NOT mean > that software there is unstable!!! It just means, that some changes > in the content of the brach are made (in the STABLE brach only > security updates are made when necessary).
...and sometimes it breaks terribly in system libraries, to the point where you need to be able to debug what's wrong on your own to be able to log in. I haven't actually had to edit a binary since I first started using Debian, but things have broken spectacularly; the most recent badly-broken-thing that comes to mind is a quoting bug in one of the X startup scripts that made it impossible to log in using xdm or run startx if ssh was installed. Being new to Debian doesn't necessarily require you to plant yourself at the latest stable released version. But if you do decide to run unstable, become familiar with the Debian bug tracking system (http://bugs.debian.org/), report bugs (possibly using the 'reportbug' package) when things break, and subscribe to the debian-devel-announce mailing list for announcements of importance to Debian-under-construction. Subscribing to debian-devel wouldn't be a bad idea, but it's fairly high-traffic (on par with debian-user). -- David Maze [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.debian.org/~dmaze/ "Theoretical politics is interesting. Politicking should be illegal." -- Abra Mitchell -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
