On Mon, 26 Jun 2023 17:04:57 +0100 Darac Marjal <mailingl...@darac.org.uk> wrote:
> > On 26/06/2023 09:18, Roger Price wrote: > > I have difficulty remembering the Debian code names for releases > > Buzz Rex Bo Hamm Slink Potato Woody Sarge Etch Lenny Squeeze Wheezy > > Jessie Stretch Buster Bullseye Bookworm Trixie and Forky. > > > > It's much easier to remember that release numbers are in a sequence > > 1.1 ... 14. > > > > Quoting from Google's response to the question “why does Debian > > have code names?”: « Originally, part of the reason for code names > > was because it was not clear whether the next release would be > > considered a point release or not: " we didn't know whether etch > > would be released as Debian 3.2 or Debian 4.0 ". » > > > > Etch was released as Debian 4.0 in May 2010. Is there some reason > > why Debian still continues to invent and use code names? > > OK, a question back at you, then: Why do you feel the need to > remember Debian codenames? As you can see, the intention of code > names is so that developers (of Debian) have a way to refer to an > as-yet-unreleased collection of packages. Once those set of packages > are released (literally, put out there in the wild), then they become > a numbered version. > > So, I'd say that, as a user of Debian, you basically want to refer to > two things: > > * Stable/OldStable/OldOldStable to refer to the current and previous > releases This sounds good in theory, but in the sources.list file, Debian defaults to the code names, not "stable"/"testing"/"unstable". Fixing this requires a manual edit. Paul -- Paul M. Foster Personal Blog: http://noferblatz.com Company Site: http://quillandmouse.com Software Projects: https://gitlab.com/paulmfoster
