Robert Nesius wrote: > A friend of mine jokes that "Debian Stable = Debian Obsolete, Debian > Testing = Debian Old, Debian Unstable = Debian Current". As a result > of Debian defining release points in terms of volatility (specifically, > almost no patches), formal releases of Debian are often over a year apart. > Indeed, that was my biggest gripe during the time I used Debian. If you want a featureful desktop system, you almost have to use Unstable, because the others are so woefully out of date (although having now dealt with RHEL, I'm practically nostalgic about Debian Stable). And unstable was mostly fine for me, except for the one day where some package update broke EVERYTHING. When you're using an "unstable" branch, that kind of thing happens occasionally, but it was frustrating because I wasn't using it out of willingness to have my system break - I just wanted a version of Amarok that wasn't two years old. Ubuntu definitely has an advantage in this arena - they get relatively recent packages from unstable, but doing release cycles lets them cherry pick a set of packages that work nicely together. Ian -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 302 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature Url : http://mailman.mn-linux.org/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20090821/b7dc980d/attachment.pgp