On Tue, Jun 11, 2002 at 04:12:01PM +0200, silverbox wrote: > hm, just a quick question: > > should it be woody or testing in sources.list ? > > mean woody is in testing right now (still) so i prefer to have testing > in. > and if it goes stable i should put stable in right ? > > isnt the "safe" way to put stable,testing,unstable into sources.list > instead of release names ? > > i am always unsure about it.
That's how the whole problem arose. For a long long time, testing has been pointed at woody. Real Soon Now(tm), stable will be pointed at woody instead. So, if you change your sources.list to woody, you will be pointed to testing now and stable after the switch (always woody). If you put in testing now, you will continue to track testing (which will soon be pointed to sarge). That's what I want to do, but most people doing a fresh installation will want to remain pointed at woody. I guess it's 'safer' to use stable, testing, and unstable, because debconf, for one, doesn't understand 'woody' and the like. But apt does, so for the sake of maintaining your installation during this transition, if you're not intending to track testing in the future, I'd have woody there right now. You can change it to stable later if it makes you feel better. Hopefully by the next transition, somebody will have figured out how to make the transitions even smoother. -- *------v--------- Installing Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 --------v------* | <http://www.debian.org/releases/woody/installmanual> | | debian-imac (potato): <http://debian-imac.sourceforge.net> | | Chris Tillman [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | May the Source be with you | *----------------------------------------------------------------* -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
