On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 08:45:27 -0400
Greg Wooledge wrote:
Hello Greg,
>Yeah, I gave the (overly) simplified set of warnings.
I'm sure we can all come up with so many different scenarios that this
could run and run if we let it.
Suffice to say, there are always exceptions that prove the rule.
Lik
On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 10:52:16AM +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> Also, currently, digikam is not in testing. No big deal, I have it
> installed and working. *However* if I had just installed testing, I
> would get digikam from stable, because I use it daily, and can't do
> certain things without it
Greg Wooledge wrote:
> YOU DO NOT MIX TESTING WITH UNSTABLE.
> If you use one of these, you use that one only. No mixing.
> No Frankendebians.
But you *can* mix Unstable with Testing. (Not the order here.)
Normally no package from Testing will get pulled in, but sometimes this
is the only way
Hi,
Brad Rogers wrote:
> > > If one uses sites such as spotify or amazon video
to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> >...but why on earth would you want to do THAT? Eeeek... ;-)
Brad Rogers wrote:
> *I* don't; It's the kids.
I wonder whether there is a Debian Developer willing to create a package
which in
On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 12:14:00 +0200
wrote:
Hello to...@tuxteam.de,
>...but why on earth would you want to do THAT? Eeeek... ;-)
*I* don't; It's the kids.
Honest.
:-)
--
Regards _
/ ) "The blindingly obvious is
/ _)radnever immediately apparent"
Where will
On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 10:52:16AM +0100, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 15:40:53 -0400
> Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
> Hello Greg,
>
> >YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH TESTING.
> >
> >YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH UNSTABLE.
> >
> >YOU DO NOT MIX TESTING WITH UNSTABLE.
>
> By and large, I agree.
>
On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 15:40:53 -0400
Greg Wooledge wrote:
Hello Greg,
>YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH TESTING.
>
>YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH UNSTABLE.
>
>YOU DO NOT MIX TESTING WITH UNSTABLE.
By and large, I agree.
I would add a few caveats, though.
If one uses sites such as spotify or amazon video,
On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 03:40:53PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
[...]
> YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH TESTING.
>
> YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH UNSTABLE.
>
> YOU DO NOT MIX TESTING WITH UNSTABLE.
Wow. I'd rather say: you do not "do not".
Know the downsides, know what can break, and then, when it's
On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 15:40:53 -0400
Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 08:35:32PM +0100, mick crane wrote:
> > Debian web page about testing is saying that testing gets infrequent
> > security updates
>
> It's more accurate to say that testing does not get ANY security
> updates. Not
On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 08:54:37PM +0100, mick crane wrote:
> yes sorry, I realized I made an error and should have typed
> bullseye for main and unstable for security updates just after pressing
> send.
> but you say not to do that ?
Correct. If you want to run unstable, just run unstable.
On 2019-10-03 20:40, Greg Wooledge wrote:
YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH TESTING.
YOU DO NOT MIX STABLE WITH UNSTABLE.
YOU DO NOT MIX TESTING WITH UNSTABLE.
If you use one of these, you use that one only. No mixing.
No Frankendebians.
https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian
yes sorry, I reali
On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 08:35:32PM +0100, mick crane wrote:
> Debian web page about testing is saying that testing gets infrequent
> security updates
It's more accurate to say that testing does not get ANY security updates.
Not in any realistic sense. Packages migrate from unstable into testing,
I didn't type previous correctly did I.
that would be
bullseye for main and unstable for security updates in sources.lists.
Is that what people do ?
mick
--
Key ID4BFEBB31
hello,
Debian web page about testing is saying that testing gets infrequent
security updates and that you can get more frequent security updates
from unstable.
Is that what people do ?
have buster for main and bullseye for security updates in sources.list ?
mick
--
Key ID4BFEBB31
or to being released as stable. I don't
> think (somone PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong) that the testing branch
> moving forward suddenly came under the security team's unbrella.
>
> Doug.
I believe that testing itself now does have (some) security support,
not from the mai
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 10:38:03PM -0700, Ross Boylan wrote:
> On security, I thought support for testing was now official, e.g., see
> this notice:
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/secure-testing-announce/2006-May/29.html
> However, that notice gives the team's web site as
> http:/
the resources
needed to properly support those. If you want to have a secure (and
stable) server you are strongly encouraged to stay with
stable. However, work is in progress to change this, with the
formation of a testing security team which has begun work to offer
security support for testing, and to so
Joe Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Joey,
>
> Because this is of interest to a very large portion of Debian's user base,
> this posting might have been better posted on debian-user-announce. I know
> that mail to that list should be minimal, but a proper announcement of this
On http://lists.d
It works great !
Thanks!
Joey Hess wrote:
Jerome BENOIT wrote:
wget http://secure-testing.debian.net/ziyi-2005-7.asc -O - | sudo apt-key
add -
I have just tried it, and I got a `404 Not found' :
Have I missed something ?
I forgot that secure-testing.debian.net is a round robin and som
Joe Smith wrote:
> Because this is of interest to a very large portion of Debian's user base,
> this posting might have been better posted on debian-user-announce. I know
> that mail to that list should be minimal, but a proper announcement of
> this to that group (to which ALL debian users real
Jerome BENOIT wrote:
> >wget http://secure-testing.debian.net/ziyi-2005-7.asc -O - | sudo apt-key
> >add -
> >
>
> I have just tried it, and I got a `404 Not found' :
>
> Have I missed something ?
I forgot that secure-testing.debian.net is a round robin and some of the
mirrors do not have that
Joey Hess wrote:
--
Debian Testing Security Annoucement November 1st, 2005
secure-testing-team@lists.alioth.debian.org Joey Hess
http://secure-testing-master.debian.net
Joey,
Because this is of interest to a very large portion of Debian's user base,
this posting might have been better posted on debian-user-announce. I know
that mail to that list should be minimal, but a proper announcement of this
to that group (to which ALL debian users really should be subs
--
Debian Testing Security Annoucement November 1st, 2005
secure-testing-team@lists.alioth.debian.org Joey Hess
http://secure-testing-master.debian.net
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 12:12:04PM +, Richard Kimber wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:48:03 +0100
> martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > also sprach Richard Kimber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.12.24.1538
> > +0100]:
> > > Where does this leave testing? Some statement would have been nice
On Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:48:03 +0100
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> also sprach Richard Kimber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.12.24.1538
> +0100]:
> > Where does this leave testing? Some statement would have been nice.
>
> testing has no security updates, at least not yet. if you are worr
also sprach Richard Kimber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.12.24.1538 +0100]:
> Where does this leave testing? Some statement would have been nice.
testing has no security updates, at least not yet. if you are worried,
install the unstable version.
--
Please do not CC me! Mutt (www.mutt.org) can hand
I note that fetchmail has a problem, and that we are told:-
For the current stable distribution (woody) this problem has been
fixed in version 5.9.11-6.2 of fetchmail and fetchmail-ssl.
For the old stable distribution (potato) this problem has been fixed
in version 5.3.3-4.3.
For the current uns
28 matches
Mail list logo
