What is stable according to Arch?

BeholdMyGlory · 2008-12-26 16:26:44

One of the main reasons for choosing Arch over Ubuntu, which i formerly used, was that all the Ubuntu pckages seemed hopelessly out of date.
But I've noticed that sometimes the packages in Arch seems a little to new, almost beta, or at least RC. So, I'm just wondering, what is stable enough to get into the three main repositories? Beta, RC, or official release?
The main reason for asking, is really if we'll get KDE 4.2 the 6th or 27th of january or, well, I can understand that we might not get it exactly then, but at least sometime near.

Mr.Elendig · 2008-12-26 17:52:25

Mostly, only 'stable' releases of apps/libs goes into core/extra, but there are a few exceptions. In some cases the rc/devel/svn/whatever versions of apps/libs are more stable and more secure than the 'stable' versions.

VPeric · 2008-12-26 19:03:26

Speaking of KDE, though, you could probably expect it around, say, the 20th. Namely, the source gets distributed to distributions a week early, so they can all prepare it in time for the "actual" release, and Arch is usually very fast.

In general, at least all the KDE versions I've ever downloaded were several days earlier than the official release. Which is pretty good, imho. <grin>

zimt · 2008-12-26 22:25:08

I don't think that the Ubuntu packages (following the 6 months release cycle) are out of date. You should try RHEL or Debian stable :-) Sometimes it even happened that Ubuntu had newer packages than Arch (immediately after a new release). IMHO, there are hardly any beta or rc packages for standard applications in Arch. You just get the latest stable version. One big advantage of Arch is that building of svn packages (using makepkg/aur) is fairly straightforward.

Allan · 2008-12-27 01:54:25

I believe Pierre has created a kde-unstable repo that has the latest 4.2 builds in it. So the packaging is all done. It will just need a rebuild once the final source is out.

jelly · 2008-12-27 11:45:44

Isn't the main thing of packages in ubuntu, that there are only security updates and after a while you can get updates form backports (the new ubuntu release). Arch is also a rolling release wich is totally different and i so far have had not many bugs. Only Xorg cost me a half hour work of editing config files.

But with ubuntu you have the same problems with xorg when a new ubuntu version is released, i have read enough posts about that problem. still this isn't your question:P

I thought packages first go in Testing for a couple of weeks and when there aren't major problems they go in core/extra

Arch Linux

#1 2008-12-26 16:26:44

What is stable according to Arch?

#2 2008-12-26 17:52:25

Re: What is stable according to Arch?

#3 2008-12-26 19:03:26

Re: What is stable according to Arch?

#4 2008-12-26 22:25:08

Re: What is stable according to Arch?

#5 2008-12-27 01:54:25

Re: What is stable according to Arch?

#6 2008-12-27 11:45:44

Re: What is stable according to Arch?

Board footer