Re: geekyness and ESR's recent tome

> Debian's package installer is best, but their stable release is 18 months
> behind RH, SUSE and MDK. I had Debian on my machine about 30 minutes before
> I decided it was too retrograde.

While true, there is the possibility of running mixed releases... I've
had a fair amount of luck running testing with bits n pieces of unstable
for things like subversion / apache2. I tried running unstable for a
while, and it just moved too fast - lots of package churn. Testing is a
nice middle ground, but is still missing the most recent versions of
packages (like svn). Mixing debian release streams _can_ get confusing,
but in general is pretty sane.

If you're wanting to stick with Stable (a good option), I haven't tried
it myself, but the folks at http://www.backports.org seem to have a
listing for subversion-1.0.0 - here's the pool directory

  http://www.backports.org/debian/dists/woody/subversion

Not sure if it means much, but there are entries on that page
timestamped with 01-MAR-2004.

If you're still willing to give debian a try, mixing stable + backports
might be an option. Requires some lines added to /etc/apt/sources.list,
but rumor has it it's just that easy. More info on the install page:
  http://www.backports.org/installation.html

Cheers
- Mark

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Mar 3 14:40:00 2004