| 1 |
On Monday 15 August 2005 11:54, Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 11:06:59 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: |
| 3 |
> > > That's the whole point. ebuilds need to be thoroughly tested before |
| 4 |
> > > being marked stable, so you need a testing branch. |
| 5 |
> > > Without it, your stable branch would not be. |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > I am a long time ~arch-only user and have/had less problems, than friends |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Spoken like a true geek :) |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> > using the stable tree. Plus if there is a problem, my friends |
| 12 |
> > with stable will hit it too some days/week later - and I am there |
| 13 |
> > 'support', so it is good for me, if I already found a solution. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Oh, there's more :) I too have found ~arch to be extremely reliable. The |
| 16 |
> main downside is the extra time spent on updates, which could be a killer |
| 17 |
> in a production environment. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
oh yeah... and don't wait too long with the updates.. less than once every few |
| 20 |
days and the problems will pile up... from my humble experience, it is much |
| 21 |
less troublesome, to do daily updates, than weekly ones ;) |
| 22 |
So ~arch is only for people who don't mind having some compiling in the |
| 23 |
background running. |
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives