On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 11:34:12AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > What would you recommend for the above right now, Andreas? > > That is, with an average teacher maintaining the system - not with Oslo > Kommune paid tech staff to run around avoiding disasters...
no, because it does not work (as they expect). > > jonas, please update yourself on the security of woody vs > > testing. testing is by far more secure then woody even without > > the 24h security fixes (but only slighly slower ones). see joeys > > webpages for the numbers. (and i dont know the url now.) > > I know that woody provides a boring desktop and has problems with spiffy > new laptops and high-end servers. But it is a surprise to me if you > claim that it is *less* secure than sarge. it is considerably less secure. > If Joeyh provides numbers comparing the security of woody and sarge then > please bring them on. he could provide those himself, perhaps? > We can hopefully soon agree on sarge as the best ever, but it is *not* > *yet* considered stable. And even when it is, that does *not* > automagically make Skolelinux+sarge stable - especially not if it is > claimed that it smoothly handles upgrades from both woody, woody-based > skolelinux and all sorts of mixes of testing sarge and unofficial > Skolelinux development cruft. ack. > > the upgrade path that you mention is still an issue. but it is an > > issue both for the sarge and for the woody installs. This is a > > dilemma of the cdds and becomes only marginally better with woody > > vs testing. In general your installation is royally broken after > > an upgrade regardless which one you used. > > My point is that there's a huge difference between creating an official > Skolelinux release that handles upgrades from the earlier officially > released Skolelinux, and one that handles upgrades from the endless > combinations of packages possible by using the ever moving target called > "testing". if we managed (ok, famous words) to make the packages we reconfigure use either multilevel configuration or parse/rewrite/upgrade their own config files that would not be a (big) issue. > Go ahead everyone, have fun with sarge before it is stable (I do it > myself too!). Just be ready to clean up again yourself - don't expect > Skolelinux to provide an upgrade path from your mess. *sight* this is what we need to do and it is really awkward. > - Jonas > > P.S. > > Don't cc me - I am subscribed to the list. hopefully i rememebre removing the cc before sending this mail -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
