07/26/2011 11:47 PM, intrigeri: > I'm usually pretty reluctant to install into Tails software that is > officially marked as experimental by upstream, but in the present > case, I happen to have been running the beta, then the RC for a while, > and have had no problem with it. Well, actually I've found it to be > running a bit more reliably than the current (0.2.1.x) stable branch. > Any differing or concurring experience report from others?
My experience is the same as yours. From my reading of the changelogs it seems that even the alpha:s are mostly plagued by critical bugs regarding relays or directory authorities/mirrors, very rarely clients. > Proposal: install Tor 0.2.2.x RC in the devel branch, meant to prepare > Tails 0.8, and fix that annoying DNS configuration in there (I > prepared last part in commit 849e922 of > feature/support_arbitrary_dns_queries Git branch, built a Tails image > from it, and tested it with Tor 0.2.2 RC. Seems to work nicely.) > > What do you think? While I'm not against it in principle, I wonder if this specific feature is important enough to break our policy of keeping Tor at the latest stable in every release. To me this move seems a bit arbitrary; I'd expect most future RCs to contain features of at least as much importance, so if we'd be consistent we'd basically always ship an RC when available. Or am I missing something? Is the current inability to query non-A records breaking something for the average Tails user? Cheers!
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ tails-dev mailing list [email protected] https://boum.org/mailman/listinfo/tails-dev
