Jaunty still in Beta?

[Thorny]

On Fri, 24 Apr 2009 12:36:53 -0400, H.S. posted:

> Thorny wrote:
>> 
>> Debian distributions "testing" and "unstable" are not betas and alphas,
>> the Debian system is organized differently than the way many other
>> distros work with RCs. I know it easy to think of "unstable" as alpha
>> and "testing" as beta and "testing" is very similar to an RC beta as
>> release
> 
> Actually, their Experimental is more like an alpha, Unstable is like a
> beta and Testing is like a RC. Testing goes through very rigorous testing
> before it is released.
> 

I know how the Debian system works, that's why I corrected you in your
previous statement. It just isn't correct to think of testing and
unstable as beta and alpha RCs, so they can't be used as examples in the
way you did in your previous post. Judging by what you wrote just above,
you too realize your previous statement wasn't correct because now you've
changed it.

> 
>> date gets close. The system is different, and, there are lots and lots
>> of troubles in Debian just after a release date when people have
>> upgrade and migration problems.
> 
> Yes, that happens after a release, but not "lots and lots". I am running
> Testing on my machine. No problems since the last release. I am running
> it on my home router and dns server as well. No problems. Unstable is
> running on an AMD 64 machine. Other than KDE 4.2 problems with Nvidia
> (in all distros I think), nothing much during the upgrade! Quite
> impressive.
>

Having been through several Debian release cycles and monitoring several
Debian lists and forums, I believe I can say lots and lots, because that's
what I observed. Your personal experience is, naturally, limited. Don't
misunderstand, I'm not knocking Debian, just correcting information. Just
because your upgrade went well doesn't mean everyones does. In addition,
you may be better at handling issues than many others, people running sid
are supposed to be, sadly not all are. You might be surprised at the
number of people who use "testing" in their sources.lst instead of
codename and get a big shock right after release when migration starts
again.


> But it is always strongly recommended to update very carefully during
> that period and to postpone it by some weeks as a caution. Usually the
> worst hit is Unstable though. However, the problems have reduced since
> the last some years. The major problems in the past were, IIRC, due to
> the change in C libraries upstream.

And the change in the way the kernel enumerates drives and udev and etc.,
etc.