Am Mittwoch 16 Mai 2007 17:17 schrieb Steve Greenland: > On 16-May-07, 06:24 (CDT), "Mgr. Peter Tuharsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It's been in context, meant as "many of those problems" -a relative part > > of problems, not absolute number of them. > > > > No, it's not worth the time. It's a history. > > The problem is that your "history" doesn't match the experience of any > one else participating in this thread. You keep making assertions about > testing being broken, sometimes with "hundreds of broken dependencies". > Since one of the key criterion of packages entering testing is > "dependencies are correct and fulfillable", this strikes most of us as > unlikely. I won't claim testing has never had a broken depends, but it's > very rare, and never hundreds of packages.
Well, last time testing broke for me was the tetex->texlive transition with one texlive package failing in post-inst because of missing files in another. Solution was to take one package from unstable that fixed the issue. It is not "very rare" the case that such things happen. Another example are incomplete KDE transitions so that some stuff stops working. However, all of those cases are solvable by pinning to testing and sometimes using few packages from unstable. HS
pgpE01GH74QFx.pgp
Description: PGP signature
