Slashdot Mirror

And I would have used it if I knew that if I added "unstable" or "testing" repository,

Or use the lenny-backports repository I mentioned above. Incidentally, I don't run Debian anymore, and they've changed the repositories around (you used to have to add a different repository to get things like Flash which you don't have to do anymore). But the first hit when you Google Debian Flash is the Debian Flash wiki, which redirects you to the Debian FlashPlayer package, which tells you where you can get it. And if you do a search on packages.debian.org for Flash, you can see which repositories it is in. You can do that generally for any package you might want to install.

But if I only want the newest version of FF (IW) but leave the rest of the system as is?

I assume if I add the "unstable" repository the updater would see that half of my system is out of date and would update it.

Mmmm...I knew you were going to ask that question. You can install only a single package (with the required dependencies) from the unstable or testing distributions, but this is definitely a more advanced configuration. You have to use apt-pinning. Here is a simple tutorial,
http://jaqque.sbih.org/kplug/apt-pinning.html

This is one thing that is nice about Debian. It allows you to do things like this even when it's not recommended. Keep in mind, the larger packages like Firefox and OpenOffice touch the system in a lot of places, so you will probably find it upgrading a number of packages when you install them (things like gnome libraries and glibc versions). You won't get a clean upgrade of just a single package. But it won't upgrade things it doesn't need to. I suggest setting it up to pull newer packages from just the testing repository first. You will be able to get most of the things you want in that distribution. You only need to add unstable if you really want to be on the bleeding edge.

Thanks very much for this post! I've been happily running Debian stable for a year or so (actually about 4 if we're counting non-desktops), but I've never really understood the demarcation between the upper versions (unstable vs testing vs experimental). Though I'd like to add that you can use apt-pinning to use less stable versions alongside more stable versions (and apt-get -t target-version install packagename to force a different version). It does tend to result in a lot of errors with dpkg/apt (library/version conflicts), but only for attempts to install packages which aren't anyway in stable - that is, you're essentially running stable proper *plus* whichever goodies from the others deign to work with installed stable libraries.

Debian unstable is really not all that bad. Once in a while there will be some inconsistencies in the repository, just wait a few days and it will get fixed. If you start fucking around with the broken packages, that's when you run into trouble. Debian testing does not receive security updates, so you don't want to run that on anything that's going to be providing any kind of services. One approach I found to work well was using debian stable, and pinning unstable packages as needed. It's a little more work though so I settled on unstable and have been very happy.

As for debian's installer, it's a straightforward ncurses dialog. What's so bad about that?

And kubuntu? They kind of dumbed down the KDE control center and that's enough to keep me away.

What you want is called "pinning." A quick Google search came up with "Apt-Pinning for Beginners"; it refers to Debian, but substitute, say, "dapper" for "unstable" and you should be good to go. Or you can check Debian's official documentation.

Of course, that assumes that the package you want is in a repository. If it's not, then you'll have to build the package yourself.

I disagree. I run servers for commercial clients. A large number of these prefer to run some type of free software as a server platform these days. Debian is an attractive platform because of the care that goes into it. The slow release cycle means that time can be spent on thorough, careful software engineering. Distributions with faster release cycles are rarely as reliable as Debian over the longer term. I and my clients are used to spending time setting up a machine, and then leaving it in production for 4-5 years with minimal maintenance. Using Debian I have found that power and hardware failures are the main cause of unplanned system downtime.

If you do want to use some of the newer packages from testing or unstable try using apt pinning on a stable system. Simply put apt pinning allows you to mix and match selected packages from stable testing and unstable together. A simple howto can be found here

There will always be challenges for Debian. The Debian leaders seem to do just that, lead. Perhaps that is why they remain such a well regarded distribution. Do not give up on Debian because of a few negative news stories. Debian has worked well for me for years. If you stick with it it should do the same for you.

Steve

One possible solution would be to divide Debian into a "server version" and one for the workstations who actually _want_ (or need) to run stuff from testing.

Or you could, you know, actually run stable on your servers and testing on workstations. Debian will let you mix and match, it's called pinning, and if you're not willing to run testing or unstable, Debian Backports provides modern packages compiled for stable.
The system you're describing already exists, you just need to know how to use it.

the debian mozilla packages currently in sid/unstable appear to be not propagating into sarge/testing due to not being built cleanly for the mips and mipsel architectures. i'm not enough of a mozilla or mips hacker to understand the exact problems with the build, but the failed build logs are available for review, if anyone wants to send hints to the debian maintainer.

if you use a more popular architecture (x86, for example), you can use the mozilla packages from unstable which are currently at 1.7.2 (1.7.3, having been released by mozilla just yesterday, has not been introduced to sid/unstable yet to my knowledge).

But there's hope: here's a good link about apt-pinning, which lets you pull select packages from sid/unstable while maintaining the rest of your system as sarge.

i just made the changes described in the link above to /etc/apt/preferences and /etc/apt/sources.list yesterday, and it worked pretty smoothly. if you run into any problems, you can try uninstalling the mozilla-browser and mozilla-mailnews packages and then reinstalling them while targetting the unstable distro like this:

apt-get remove --purge mozilla-mailnews mozilla-browser
apt-get -t unstable install mozilla

Via the magic of apt-pinning you can install packages from later sources onto woody, with dependencies being met as needed to install them.

It really makes it easier to run a secure ssh box, but get the most recent aptitude (for example).

I believe in capitalism and the free trade concept, but I just don't understand how we can prevail on the IP tip. As the basic science becomes concrete, the applied science becomes 'trade secrets'. These copyrighted trade secrets (not always 75 years, I think a court has to approve the 75 year thing IIRC) are held with a company forever basically, while in a communist developed country they are shared across institutions. How can our science stay competitive in the future under this system? I can't think of a viable way. (I know the system of government in China is deplorable in how it deals with it's citizens, but I am merely speculating and arguing the IP and copyright aspects of the forms of government.)

And before someone else does it, here is the obvious joke.

Also, there's Apt Pinning. You can install a stable system, then upgrade the specific programs you use to their versions in sid (which is most often the newest available version of the program). And if they don't work, you can downgrade back to the stable versions.