Linked by Thomas Leonard on Tue 16th Jan 2007 00:32 UTC
Permalink for comment 202333
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-02
And see, that's where you get it wrong. The latest and greatest "developer release" tends to be better than the previous version.
Yes, but often (in the Linux world) those "latest and greatest" are beta versions, which may introduce breakage, especially if they depend on lots of other packages.
And the latest and greatest developer release tends to lag behind the repository version.
I think you probably meant the opposite...
Again, the amount of lag varies. For me (someone who likes to try out new versions), I find that with Ubuntu the delays are acceptable.
Hell, in Ubuntu you're in this bizarro world of various degrees of instability before a real release, and then nothing else besides security updates.
Not so. Just add the "Backports" repository to Synaptic, and you'll get newer versions of apps for your stable distro.
And there are not "various degrees of instability". There is only the current release and the next (unstable) release. I think you're confusing Ubuntu with Debian here...