On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 19:38, Oon-Ee Ng <ngoonee.talk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: -~> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 12:19 AM, Leonid Isaev <lisaev@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: -~> >> On (10/24/11 18:00), Karol Blazewicz wrote: -~> >> -~> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Leonid Isaev <lisaev@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: -~> >> -~> > Besides, one really doesn't have to enable testing in pacman.conf -- individual -~> >> -~> > pacman -U will do, imho. -~> >> -~> -~> >> -~> I've read that [testing] is all or nothing and you shouldn't -~> >> -~> cherrypick packages because you might break something. -~> >> -~> Somewhat relevant https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=127144 -~> >> -~> >> That's where brain comes in handy :) -~> >> -~> > Yes, its a REALLY good idea to state that its okay to pacman -U -~> > individual [testing] packages on a public mailing list with at least -~> > some users who really don't know any better than to do just that. -~> > Say I want to try package X, but instead I download pkgs X, Y and Z from testing. Now my scripts which rely on /proc/.../BAT0/* fail because pkg Y is a new kernel, /dev/cdrom is gone since pkg Z is udev. And all I wanted is to try out new qemu-kvm... IMHO saying that testing is for experienced people is misleading since "experienced" is a vague term; such statements only repell users. A useful guideline would be "think three times before you type and understand how package management works". -- Leonid Isaev GnuPG key ID: 164B5A6D Key fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D
Attachment:
pgpPFxxKj3sxp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
