On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 3:39 AM, Alan Ianson <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Yep, even though it's called unstable it's like a rock.. :) > I run unstable on everything, unless there is a reason not to (e.g my mailserver, which runs zimbra has to run stable, and my firewall alternates between testing and stable). In my experience, unstable is more stable than testing, because of the whole vetting process from unstable to testing. As for installing unstable, I find the easiest way would be to install stable, then add a line to /etc/apt/apt.conf: APT::Default-Release "unstable"; where "unstable" can be replaced with "testing" "stable" or the actual release name. The nice part about using the release name is that when a new version of stable is released, you stay with the release you are running, and don't have any unintended dist-upgrades. I also use a "generic" sources.list file (attached), and add any extra repos to /etc/apt/sources.list.d. --b
sources.list
Description: Binary data
