I've been running cooker myself for a good number of months now - I can safely say, it is dangerous if you want a stable system - I've had it break my xconfig, kdm, loose my mail, and screw up other bits and pieces (through my own dumb-ass fault and cooker been broken)
That said, I still run cooker... I make regular backup's of /etc and /home, and I leave mail on a seperate mailserver as a backup. Cooker is a great way of running the very latest bleeding edge software but more importantly, it's a _great_ way of learning about linux. If you spot any bugs in it, by all means report them to the list (but try and be polite about it after it's wrecked something ;�) btw: More often than not, someone else will have spotted the problem before you, so it's often worth checking back through the archives... that's my excuse for not being able to contribute much anyway ;) On Thursday 04 Apr 2002 7:15 pm, Michael Andreen wrote: > I posted this as reply to another thread, but looks like the discussion in > that thread is over and noone is planning an answer, so here it is now, but > not as a reply. > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Wednesday 03 April 2002 10.29, Laurent Montel wrote: > > Perhaps you don't know but cooker is DIFFERENT from 8.2 ! > > When this is up.. It's been said that it's dangerous to run cooker, but how > dangerous is it really? > > I've been "idling" on this mailinglist for a few months now and I can't see > that it's more dangerous than always compiling and running the latest > release of everything (which I tend to be doing after a while, or > "stealing" a cooker package once in a while and get it into the stable > dist), actually it seems less dangerous since you mdk guys are more > experianced and follows the development of your packages better than me (I > guess). > > So what's recommended? Running a stable release and compiling the latest > software/ using a few cooker packages in the stable release or running a > pure cooker system? > > Michael Andreen > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
