[Pkg-exim4-users] stable vs. other repositories

[Andreas Metzler]

On 2005-12-03 Gerhard Kroder <gerhard.kroder at t-online.de> wrote:
> Andreas Metzler wrote:
> >On 2005-12-03 Gerhard Kroder <gerhard.kroder at t-online.de> wrote:
> >>me getting OT:
[...]
> >>How do YOU deal with this?
[...]
>> Current clamav for sarge is availble on volatile.
>> deb http://ftp2.de.debian.org/debian-volatile sarge/volatile main
 
> uuh, haven't heard of "volatile" 'till now. sounds interesting.

> >Once the dak
> >setup on backports.org is finished the packages will propagate to the
> >regular backports.org repository.)
> >
> Good to have alternatives, and i consider making use of them. But, as 
> side effect, we step out of the "stable" concept for productive 
> environments, don't we? With no basic "in time" security updates? I 
> really appreciate people supplying backports, sideports and other 
> repositories, and i know they support this as far as possible. But this 
> probably less standardized as "regular security support".
[...]

Using volatile _should_ be just as good as running stable, see
<http://volatile.debian.net/>. The service is quite new, so it might be
too early to tell whether the promises are kept.

With backports.org the situation is approximately the same as with
running unstable. Breakage can happen (but is usually fixed quickly).
                cu andreas
-- 
The 'Galactic Cleaning' policy undertaken by Emperor Zhark is a personal
vision of the emperor's, and its inclusion in this work does not constitute
tacit approval by the author or the publisher for any such projects,
howsoever undertaken.                                (c) Jasper Ffforde