On Mon, 2003-02-10 at 15:06, tarvid wrote:
> On Thursday 06 February 2003 05:06 pm, Pixel wrote:
> > Stefan van der Eijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > PS: Some friends have always argued that the debian way is the only
> > > sustainable way to go. If mdk is going to do it just like debian, why not
> > > fold and move the idea's and effort into making debian a better distro
> > > instead of duplicating the effort?
> >
> > one main difference with debian, is that mandrake (tries to) takes
> > into account the users's needs (and not only the developers's needs)
> >
> > another difference is the timing of stabilisation: someone told me
> > that debian is either not uptodate (the "stable" branch), or less
> > stable than Mandrake ("testing")
>
> For not entirely logical reasons, I keep one Debian "testing" box around.
>
> It is acceptably stable for what it does (backup) but is is not as close to
> the edge as 9.0.
>
> For example:
>
> samnite:~# uname -a
> Linux samnite 2.4.17-bf2.4 #1 Son Feb 24 13:00:32 CET 2002 i686 AMD Duron(tm)
> Processor AuthenticAMD GNU/Linux
> samnite:~# gcc -v
> Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-linux/2.95.4/specs
> gcc version 2.95.4 20011002 (Debian prerelease)
>
> I ran apt-get update and upgrade this morning.
Is "testing" or "unstable" more up to date?
--
adamw
