[sf-lug] SF-LUG & BALUG: System OS upgrades *soon*(?) - volunteer(s)?
cymraegish at gmail.com
Mon Jan 23 18:34:57 PST 2012
IIRC some major installations choose to use the proper names.
Why - well for some other distros (eg Ubuntu) than Debian releases ("when
ready") are not so stable / secure when new.
Even with Debian tho there are always technical adjustments (new features,
even dropped packages).
There is a desire for planned rather than forced upgrades.
Also one may /should be able to upgrade less often. I thought one release
back was always supported ?
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com> wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Somebody obviously decided to commit this blunder as a deliberate policy
> > choice, possibly the 'expert Linux sys admin with a particularly good
> > set of best practices' you speak of? ;->
> Quick, Sherman! The Wayback Machine!
> In 2007, I cautioned Michael Paoli and others against their proposal to
> peg Debian to a named branch and explained why it was unwise. Might
> want to work with the Debian administrative regime. It turns out better.
> sf-lug mailing list
> sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
> Information about SF-LUG is at http://www.sf-lug.org/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the sf-lug