On Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 09:46:13AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote: > On Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 01:22:12PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote: > > debian 'unstable' is perfectly usable for production servers, using > > it for such does not require any more caution about upgrades than > > using debian 'stable' or debian 'frozen'. > > Like during the Perl transition period, or when a recent libstdc++ > broke apt, or when su stopped being able to su, or when .... > > Need I continue?
i repeat: "[using unstable] does not require any more caution about upgrades than [using stable]" upgrading to whatever the latest stable releases is requires just as much caution/paranoia as upgrading to whatever is in the latest unstable. anyone who trusts the latest debian stable release on their critical/production servers without testing it on other machines first deserves whatever they get. if you have a clue and you are cautious then both stable and unstable are safe. if you don't have a clue or you are not cautious, then neither are. craig -- craig sanders
