6 Jan
2006
6 Jan
'06
5:38 a.m.
Next: There's plenty of reason to run unstable (at least everyone I know
that runs debian on their desktop thinks so). I normally don't have any
problems with my (stable) unstable box.
I had NOT problems, too - unstable usually works fine
Against stable: Stable is nice, and I pray release rates are speeded up
after the fuzz about stable. But 3 years is simply too long on my
desktop. I tried backporting, never liked it.
this was always problem - decide between backporting or upgrade.. :/
Against testing: Testing is (in a bad way) in between stable and
testing. It seems there's no real consensus at to when packages arrive
in testing, so some part of the system is almost as old as stable and
others are as unstable as unstable.
Testing is more unstable the unstable itself .. it is because of
"testing" means "during the freeze process" && unstable means
"unsecure
but working" - however who of us wants "the safest audio station on
world" ;)
my experience from Debian is, that it works out-of-the-box, however ....
there are many little troubles and if you want to go to realtime kernel
&& audio apps, you can reach big number of little troubles very soon ... :/
that is the reason why I am now tuning Gentoo.... seems to be really
faster, more stable with "strange work parameters" like realtime
processing... and the only problem is - if somebody wants it - to have
just fast processor / emerge process can run 1-2 days
of course - no offence for Debian, I still love it for philosophy &&
really user-friendly, clear and smart system.
--
Piotr