You are not logged in.

#1 2006-06-20 21:28:41

joepotter
Member
From: Orlando, Fl. USA
Registered: 2005-12-31
Posts: 31

How safe is "testing"?

Would  Arch "testing" compare to Debian Sid? Or would it be even more stable?

Thanks.


Regards, Joe

Offline

#2 2006-06-20 21:52:41

rayjgu3
Member
From: Chicago IL usa
Registered: 2004-07-04
Posts: 692

Re: How safe is "testing"?

well arch is kinda known for bleeding edge which means something from testing might bork your box, if so as long as you dont clear your cache you could revert back to an older package or  comment out testing  pacman -Syu will tell you  which packages are newer than whats in current & extra .remove  those pkgs reinstall them from there will bring you back to whats arch stable

so in other words
GO FOR IT
see if you can bork your box then fix it ITS FUN
lol

Offline

#3 2006-06-20 22:02:13

lucke
Member
From: Poland
Registered: 2004-11-30
Posts: 4,018

Re: How safe is "testing"?

Blah. That's the problem with Arch - it just works, even with all the testing stuff ;-(

Offline

#4 2006-06-20 22:42:34

Gullible Jones
Member
Registered: 2004-12-29
Posts: 4,863

Re: How safe is "testing"?

It's pretty stable in my experience. Whereas Debian Unstable (and even Testing) seems to include a lot of CVS stuff, Arch's Testing repo usually just has the latest releases, plus development versions of whatever the devs happen to be working on and occasionally (e.g. right now) things compiled against new libraries. Testing has been known to get slightly broken but that usually doesn't last too long, or become a tremendous issue for desktop users.

Offline

#5 2006-06-20 23:14:26

joepotter
Member
From: Orlando, Fl. USA
Registered: 2005-12-31
Posts: 31

Re: How safe is "testing"?

Thanks for all the replies, I upgraded to testing on reading replies here and all went fine.

So far so good, thanks for you thoughts.


Regards, Joe

Offline

#6 2006-06-21 00:10:53

brain0
Developer
From: Aachen - Germany
Registered: 2005-01-03
Posts: 1,382

Re: How safe is "testing"?

You are posting on the "Newbie Corner" forum, which tells me that you do not want to use testing.

Offline

#7 2006-06-21 00:22:45

T-Dawg
Forum Fellow
From: Wilmington, NC
Registered: 2005-01-29
Posts: 2,734

Re: How safe is "testing"?

brain0 wrote:

You are posting on the "Newbie Corner" forum, which tells me that you do not want to use testing.

Thank you brain zero.

The only thing from testing I use is the kernel and that particular kernel incorporates mkinitcpio, which is a new system to arch and is still experimental. It can be real easy boot up into an unsuable system if you don't read the wiki on it -and there's already a bug with klibc mounting ext3 as ext2. I'm not saying stay away from it, arch needs testers, but just beware if you don't feel kernel savy.

Offline

#8 2006-06-21 00:43:16

joepotter
Member
From: Orlando, Fl. USA
Registered: 2005-12-31
Posts: 31

Re: How safe is "testing"?

brain0 wrote:

You are posting on the "Newbie Corner" forum, which tells me that you do not want to use testing.


I picked this forum due to the nature of the question and the fact that I have only used Arch occasionally. I thought about putting my post in the pacman/upgrade sub-forum, but I did not really have an "issue," only a general question. (and one that can lead to controversy if one is not careful)

If Arch "testing" brings down this partition/distro, I'll be just fine as one of the 3 others (Debian based) distros on this box will do. I have used some sort of *nix since I started with Mark Williams Coherent in the 80s. I think I'll be able to muddle along with the kind assistance of the fine folks who frequent here.


Regards, Joe

Offline

#9 2006-06-21 01:02:29

Gullible Jones
Member
Registered: 2004-12-29
Posts: 4,863

Re: How safe is "testing"?

Penguin wrote:
brain0 wrote:

You are posting on the "Newbie Corner" forum, which tells me that you do not want to use testing.

Thank you brain zero.

The only thing from testing I use is the kernel and that particular kernel incorporates mkinitcpio, which is a new system to arch and is still experimental. It can be real easy boot up into an unsuable system if you don't read the wiki on it -and there's already a bug with klibc mounting ext3 as ext2. I'm not saying stay away from it, arch needs testers, but just beware if you don't feel kernel savy.

mkinitcpio isn't very tough to handle in my experience. However I hadn't tried it with ext2/ext3... Thanks for mentioning that bug.

Offline

#10 2006-06-21 05:56:59

brain0
Developer
From: Aachen - Germany
Registered: 2005-01-03
Posts: 1,382

Re: How safe is "testing"?

Penguin wrote:

The only thing from testing I use is the kernel and that particular kernel incorporates mkinitcpio, which is a new system to arch and is still experimental. It can be real easy boot up into an unsuable system if you don't read the wiki on it -and there's already a bug with klibc mounting ext3 as ext2. I'm not saying stay away from it, arch needs testers, but just beware if you don't feel kernel savy.

I don't see this bug, ext3 is mounted as ext3 here like it should be. But that is off-topic in this thread.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB