On 05/07/2017 04:19 PM, RavenLX wrote: > On 05/07/2017 04:33 PM, cbannis...@kinect.co.nz wrote: >> By the way, the words "unstable" "stable" as used in the distribution >> names >> don't mean likely to crash, --- it refers to the amount of changes >> occurring, i.e. 'stable' has no new packages entering it, and >> supposedly only >> security updates, whereas "unstable" is unstable because there are many >> changes occuring on a constant basis. > > Thank you for this info. I admit I always thought "unstable" meant it > might still have bugs or still be in beta. I don't mind when things > change frequently because sometimes this is how one can get new features > in a newer version of a program. > Yeah, this is one of the main things sited as a drawback to the Debian distribution....packages are sometimes a little older than in other distributions. But, this is because the Debian developers spend so much time making sure that they work properly in the distribution before they are released in the repositories. As a result, things change a lot less frequently. The benefit of this is that Debian is 'stable' in all senses of the word...few serious bugs and system instability, and little or no instability in what is part of the distribution. For many people, especially businesses, this stability is important. For others, like myself, I can afford a little more instability, and so can deal with any instability in testing for the benefit of getting newer versions of the packages and run Testing (Stretch). Many people also run Experimental (Sid) for the benefit of bleeding-edge versions of software, but a lot of instability (in all senses of the word). >
-- 73's, WB5VQX -- The Very Quick X-ray
