On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 06:32:01PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > IMO, if you need a 'stable' system with some newer packages, you're
> > better off learning how apt's pinning stuff works than bothering with
> > backports. it's not hard.
>
> The only problem with that is that you then get a whole shitload of
> problems once libc or other dependencies are no longer in sync with
> stable. As is the case right now. At that point, you start getting those
s/problems/differences/
differences MIGHT mean problems. or they might not.
alternatively (and more commonly) differences might mean bug-fixes
that will never appear in stable because they're not critical security
fixes, and may not appear in backports either because the fixed package
is a lib package...and if it does make it to backports, it's after a
significant delay as the fixed package makes its way from unstable to
testing and eventually to backports.
stable, testing, unstable, backports - they each have their own set of risks
and problems.
craig
--
craig sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
It is well known that *things* from undesirable universes are always seeking
an entrance into this one, which is the psychic equivalent of handy for the
buses and closer to the shops.
-- Terry Pratchett, "The Light Fantastic"
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
