[Gllug] Ubuntu (was: Re: Help !!!!)

[Ian Norton]

On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 04:53:12PM +0100, Jan Kokoska wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-09-30 at 08:53 +0100, Martin A. Brooks wrote:
> > On Thu, 2004-09-30 at 08:47, NorthLondon John wrote:
> > 
> > This distro seems great for those who want a more-often-updated debian,
> > but don't want to run unstable.  I don't see why these people don't sit
> > on testing, though.
> 
> Because testing is worst option of all. You don't get security updates
> for stable, but you don't get them bundled with feature updates in
> unstable in timely manner either. Your machines are going to be wide
> open to the publicly announced vulnerabilities for weeks (at least),
> before the new version propagates.

Well, admittedly you do have to wait for bugfixes, but usually debian packages
by default are setup with good enough configurations that mean most of these
vulns dont pose a threat. ( afaik the openssh vuln from recently wasnt an issue
unless you had disabled some configs with debian )

> > I've mentioned before that I run production boxes on unstable, so I have
> > all the bleeding edge I need, anyway. :)
> > 
> 
> Cool, how do your custom applications like it? Don't they happily break
> to pieces after every other dist-upgrade? 

Ive tended to avoid dist-upgrades for a few years now, when things are in stable it is usually fine, unstable and testing however are by no means the same from one day to the next, consequently I wouldnt expect dist-upgrade to work well.
 
I would say if you want to use unstable, do so, installing from unstable is
fine , and using stable as an apt source after is a good compramise.

Ian

-- 
/* www.darkspace.org.uk {
 web development, application development, consultancy, firewalls 
 */
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug