Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID:	<4162CAB3.2EEC6427@dessent.net>
Date:	Tue, 05 Oct 2004 09:24:19 -0700
From:	Brian Dessent <brian AT dessent DOT net>
Organization:	My own little world...
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin-talk AT cygwin DOT com
CC:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Which Linux after CyGwin?
References:	<F67AB1DD14544242BE5BFE94F5939175018D7818 AT E2KMEMMCS1 DOT ftbco DOT ftn DOT com>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

(Take this to cygwin-talk please.)

"DePriest, Jason R." wrote:

> If you do use
> Debian, please don't use the 'stable' release.  It is very ancient (but
> stable!).  Use the 'testing' release.  For the most part, you won't have
> any problems and if you do have a problem, expect it to be fixed
> quickly.

That's a very slippery slope and disagrees sharply from the official
Debian line.  You are strongly urged to NOT use "testing" in a
production environment.  Why?  Because criticial security bug fixes are
only guaranteed for "stable".  They occur for testing and unstable of
course, but at a relaxed pace.  I think that you do a disservice by
automatically stating that one should ignore "stable".  At the very
least point them to <http://www.debian.org/releases/> so that they can
decide for themselves.

It is entirely possible to run the stable branch without ancient
versions of everything: <http://backports.org/>

Brian

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -