* Brian Ballsun-Stanton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [010715 19:13]:
This is my dilemma: to run samba-tng, I have to upgrade to unstable. My
mandate explictly states that downtime is *BAD*, very, very, very,
bad. How risky is running unstable? What shouldn't I do? Should I upgrade
to 2.4.6? (I'm
On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 03:43:30AM +0100, Neil Durant wrote:
Brian Ballsun-Stanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
This is my dilemma: to run samba-tng, I have to upgrade to unstable. My
mandate explictly states that downtime is *BAD*, very, very, very,
bad. How risky is running unstable? What
I meant as a PDC :)
File sharing, sure, it works with my 2k box now, but I heard that it uses
legacy auth stuff.
On Mon, 16 Jul 2001, Sam Varghese wrote:
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 14:37:51 +1000
From: Sam Varghese [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Newbieish
Hi Brian,
I recently went through two upgrade cycles - from stable (AKA Potato) to
testing (AKA Woody), and then to unstable (AKA Sid).
On Sid about a 100 or so packages are updated everyday. A few weeks ago, I
had a severely disabled system when the PAM modules failed to function. In
.
On Mon, 16 Jul 2001, Andy Saxena wrote:
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 20:48:50 -0400
From: Andy Saxena [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Brian Ballsun-Stanton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Newbieish question
Hi Brian,
I recently went through two upgrade cycles - from
Andy == Andy Saxena [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andy On Sid about a 100 or so packages are updated everyday. A few weeks
ago, I
Andy had a severely disabled system when the PAM modules failed to
function. In
Andy essence, I couldn't log into the system.
Another important rule for
Please take pity :)
I'm an extreme newbie to debian (having installed it for the first time
about a week ago. I was assiged the task of setting up a 50 seat network,
and since we're an edcuational institution, we have a really tight
budget: the savings of not having to buy a $9 per person
On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 12:11:38PM -0700, Brian Ballsun-Stanton wrote:
This is my dilemma: to run samba-tng, I have to upgrade to unstable. My
mandate explictly states that downtime is *BAD*, very, very, very,
bad. How risky is running unstable? What shouldn't I do? Should I upgrade
to 2.4.6?
2001 04:21:21 +0200
From: Stephen Rueger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Newbieish question
Resent-Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 12:22:21 -0700
Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org
On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 12:11:38PM -0700, Brian Ballsun-Stanton wrote:
This is my
On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, Brian Ballsun-Stanton wrote:
Unfortuantly, we'll still be using w2k clients. Now, not having my head
completly buried in my ::cough:: I knew that samba could provide file
sharing. Little did I know that samba-tng would provide good w2k access.
This is my dilemma: to
Brian Ballsun-Stanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Unfortuantly, we'll still be using w2k clients. Now, not having my head
completly buried in my ::cough:: I knew that samba could provide file
sharing. Little did I know that samba-tng would provide good w2k access.
This is my dilemma: to run
On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 12:24:30PM -0700, Brian Ballsun-Stanton wrote:
Well, sorta ::chuckles::
I don't mind upgrading stuff (I think...) but... I don't know what not to
do
I think main question is: how unstable is unstable, and how do I make it
more stable?
I'd say, unstable is
On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 04:21:21AM +0200, Stephen Rueger wrote:
On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 12:11:38PM -0700, Brian Ballsun-Stanton wrote:
This is my dilemma: to run samba-tng, I have to upgrade to unstable. My
mandate explictly states that downtime is *BAD*, very, very, very,
bad. How risky
::
On Mon, 16 Jul 2001, David Purton wrote:
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2001 11:57:17 +0930 (CST)
From: David Purton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Brian Ballsun-Stanton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Newbieish question
On Sun, 15 Jul 2001, Brian Ballsun-Stanton wrote
On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 12:37:21PM -0700, Brian Ballsun-Stanton wrote:
Thank you, Its not so much upgrading to testing, or to 2.4... I'm just
wondering if 2.4 will improve stablitity in unstable. The only thing I
have to go to unstable for is samba-tng (for my 2k clients). And I want to
On Sun, Jul 15, 2001 at 07:52:00PM -0700, Bob Nielsen wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 04:21:21AM +0200, Stephen Rueger wrote:
Don't forget to apt-get upgrade :-)
Actually if all you want to get from unstable is a few selected source
packages, DON'T 'apt-get upgrade', but you must
Brian Ballsun-Stantonwrites:
Thank you, Its not so much upgrading to testing, or to 2.4... I'm just
wondering if 2.4 will improve stablitity in unstable.
It will make no difference. Don't upgrade your kernel unless you need to.
BTW, 'unstable' doesn't mean what you think it does. It isn't
17 matches
Mail list logo
