> On 12/6/05, Arnaud Fortier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I agree with benoit ! >> Initscripts / php / udev / hotplug / hwdetect ... these packages >> SHOULD be tested before release in current ! And also largely >> commented with some kind of HOW-TO ! >> A good exemple is the remove of synchronisation between hal-fstab, it >> was removed, nobody tells anybody of this new "feature" and udev was >> not at this moment replacing the hal's fstab lacks !! >> And what can we think about php5.1 droped directly in current ! Ok it >> was corrected in 4 hours but what is the point of the testing repo >> then ... Also I'm having problem with udev and USB Hard drive, I >> reinstall arch from scratch, using hwdetect / udev and the hard drive >> doesn't mount "automatically" anymore ! ... >> I see the pmount trick ... and finally add a line in fstab ... >> > > Arch is bleeding edge. See About page: > http://www.archlinux.org/about.php > > Note the word bleeding. > > Things will break occasionally, and thats just part of the fun of > using Arch. Most major things are put in testing and are there for a > reasonable amount of time. Other things which would seem like a minor > version upgrade have also caused problems, these cant be forseen by the > devs, and its impractical to put every minor version into testing. > > You dont realise how much more trouble you would have if everything went > straight to extra/current. > > I like bleeding, and most of the time its not bad at all, a minor fix or > glance at the mailing list, homepage or wiki to fix it. > > iphitus > > > > -- > iphitus - archck maintainer, arch trusted user. > Home:iphitus.loudas.com >
Hey gang; O.K......I have kept my mouth shut about all of this until now. Guys, there *IS* a problem, and Beloit outlined it nicely. Things are considerably more unstable than I have *EVER* seen them since starting with arch YEARS AGO. And the documentation associated with the changes that bring on these unstable moments is slim and generally too late. It is close to a paradigm shift in the way arch appears to the user/administrator that upgrades his/her machine(s). Now I am *not* being critical of anyone or anything, but things HAVE changed. It is your perspective as to whether this is good, bad, or of no concern. And we are ALL entitled to such a perspective. So to the devs replying that things are o.k., please try to remember that YOUR work is causing some people some amount of anguish that they are not use to when using arch-linux. And you should be considerate of them when they take the time to test and reply to your work. Very best regards; Bob Finch _______________________________________________ arch mailing list arch@archlinux.org http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
