At 9:39 AM -0400 9/20/03, William Allen Simpson wrote:
>Matthias Scheler wrote:
>>
>>  In article <3F6A8D3B.2A1024F8@greendragon.com>,
>>          William Allen Simpson <wsimpson@greendragon.com> writes:
>>  > Never-the-less, I started this thread because (much to my surprise)
>>  > debian took less than 2 minutes!  It's also easier!  And it scales!
>>
>>  You were just lucky. I've seen people which wanted to fetch a security
>>  patch and ended (several hours) later with a mostly new Linux
>>  installation because the "libc" package was updated. Needless to say
>>  that several things were broken afterwards.
>>
>So, you are claiming the package maintainers do a bad job?  On some
>particular (unspecified) release of Linux?
>
>And this is different in some way from NetBSD, where a single change
>last summer rendered printf in sh inoperable, so I couldn't even run
>make to recompile, and had to do a complete reinstallation from *.tgz?

There's a difference between a security update on Linux-RELEASE and 
you *choosing* to follow -current on NetBSD. Whether on NetBSD or on 
Linux, following -current is *NEVER*GUARANTEED*TO*WORK.

You can't compare -current with STABLE, RELEASE, etc. no matter what 
OSes are being discussed.

Mike
-- 
Bikers don't *DO* taglines.