Am i playing with fire?
Hi, Some packages i want to install on my Squeeze machine just don't have the right dependencies or packages, so i take what i need from testing. Am i going to bork my installation? Mark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/cabwh29mwqjmxc6c7kehknvgsvoanzj4iymxxzf3rswaf_02...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Am i playing with fire?
On Sun, 2011-09-25 at 13:31 +0200, Mark Panen wrote: Hi, Some packages i want to install on my Squeeze machine just don't have the right dependencies or packages, so i take what i need from testing. Am i going to bork my installation? Short answer: Yes. Butmore info is needed. What packages are you looking to install? Have you looked at backports? -- Pete Orrall ppat...@gmail.com If there isn't a way I'll make one. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1316952241.2456.65.camel@Neuron.8EEWS
Re: Am i playing with fire?
Mark Panen wrote at 2011-09-25 06:31 -0500: Some packages i want to install on my Squeeze machine just don't have the right dependencies or packages, so i take what i need from testing. Am i going to bork my installation? Perhaps, but probably not (according to my experience). Use packages from backports instead, if available. I mix stable/testing/unstable often with very little trouble. But I am careful about what packages I upgrade, and my system is always either mostly stable or mostly testing. Generally, stand-alone packages can be upgraded without any trouble, but core packages should be left alone. The more reverse dependencies a package has, the more careful you should be about upgrading it. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Am i playing with fire?
green wrote: Mark Panen wrote at 2011-09-25 06:31 -0500: Some packages i want to install on my Squeeze machine just don't have the right dependencies or packages, so i take what i need from testing. Am i going to bork my installation? Perhaps, but probably not (according to my experience). Use packages from backports instead, if available. I mix stable/testing/unstable often with very little trouble. But I am careful about what packages I upgrade, and my system is always either mostly stable or mostly testing. Generally, stand-alone packages can be upgraded without any trouble, but core packages should be left alone. The more reverse dependencies a package has, the more careful you should be about upgrading it. sort of depends on the packages for o/s and core packages, I tend to rely on oldstable (i.e., Lenny) - I try to keep a stable environment for servers and applications (e.g., mailing list manager, blog engine) - where currency tends to be important - I generally download and build the upstream source - it takes a little more work to make sure dependencies are in place, but I find that the upstream make files are more reliable than the bleeding edge packaging. At least in my case, a lot of the packages I use are developed on Debian - so the upstream source is as good or better than the packaging. specific example: I run a lot of mailing lists of one machine (actually a VM): - hypervisor (Xen) and O/S (Lenny) - basic installs, rely on apt- to keep stuff current - LAMP (the AMP part) - rely on apt- - mail stuff (Postfix, Spamassassin, ClamAV, avavisd) - again, rely on apt- but... requires some manual wiring together - perl - rely on apt- for core; rely on cpan to update - sympa - the mail list manager, built in perl - install from source - it's makefile invokes cpan to install dependencies (but doesn't always get things right - sometimes have to invoke cpan manually); then it builds and runs just fine -- the upstream version is always several revs ahead of the Debian packages, and I've yet to find a packaged version that actually installs cleanly granted, it's a bit harder to manage a system when one goes around the package manager, but sometimes you can get better results Miles Fidelman -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. Infnord practice, there is. Yogi Berra -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e7f3945.3080...@meetinghouse.net
Re: Am i playing with fire?
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 13:31:34 +0200, Mark Panen wrote: Some packages i want to install on my Squeeze machine just don't have the right dependencies or packages, so i take what i need from testing. Am i going to bork my installation? What packages are they (the ones you wanted to install)? Maybe there is another way to proceed. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.25.14.32...@gmail.com
Re: Am i playing with fire?
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Camaleón noela...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 13:31:34 +0200, Mark Panen wrote: Some packages i want to install on my Squeeze machine just don't have the right dependencies or packages, so i take what i need from testing. Am i going to bork my installation? What packages are they (the ones you wanted to install)? Maybe there is another way to proceed. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.25.14.32...@gmail.com I have already installed them, i have made Squeeze as my main desktop the last 3 days and have forgotten half the stuff i did. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CABWh29n90k8tR+kQHT9QQXsGgt7=+mxlxh0ou2rujxtocfa...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Am i playing with fire?
Ive had the same problems and unfortunatly Ive never found the ones I need in backports. For example there isnt even a newer version of Shotwell in backports so Im stuck on 0.6. Currently having problems with not being able to use a modern version of WebKitGTK because of the age of libsoup glib. This is why im keen on the proposed 'Continuously Usable Testing' distro although I think it needs a more stable sounding name perhaps something like Debian Rolling Sent from iPhone On 25 Sep 2011, at 14:56, green greenfreedo...@gmail.com wrote: Mark Panen wrote at 2011-09-25 06:31 -0500: Some packages i want to install on my Squeeze machine just don't have the right dependencies or packages, so i take what i need from testing. Am i going to bork my installation? Perhaps, but probably not (according to my experience). Use packages from backports instead, if available. I mix stable/testing/unstable often with very little trouble. But I am careful about what packages I upgrade, and my system is always either mostly stable or mostly testing. Generally, stand-alone packages can be upgraded without any trouble, but core packages should be left alone. The more reverse dependencies a package has, the more careful you should be about upgrading it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/82000d1f-1e6d-4d96-8c28-0dfe48366...@me.com
Re: Am i playing with fire?
Andrew Wood wrote at 2011-09-25 09:13 -0500: This is why im keen on the proposed 'Continuously Usable Testing' distro although I think it needs a more stable sounding name perhaps something like Debian Rolling What's in a name? And generally, stable is stable because of its age. You just can not have software that is both new and stable. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
