Re: [LAU] Is Debian testing for audio and MIDI already in good shape?

On Thu, 2011-06-02 at 10:16 +0200, rosea grammostola wrote:
> On 06/02/2011 10:06 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-06-02 at 09:43 +0200, rosea.grammostola wrote:
> >> On 06/02/2011 04:59 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> >>> Repositories: All 'regular' Debian stable + debian-multimedia stable,
> >>> excepted of Evolution + dependencies ;) (I could downgrade Evolution)
> >>>
> >>> Package: libslv2-dev
> >>>
> >>> Missing dependency.
> >>>
> >>> Caused by
> >>>
> >>> libgnutls-dev:
> >>> Depends: libgnutls26 (=2.8.6-1) but 2.10.5-1+b1 is to be installed
> >>>
> >>> Hm?
> >>>
> >>> I guess I'll upgrade to testing ;). OTOH it's more important to have
> >>> stable DAW. Does somebody use Debian testing for audio and MIDI?
> >>>
> >>> Should I avoid an upgrade?
> >> I do use debian testing (not doing serious stuff these days though).
> >> Debian testing is pretty stable, more stable then the latest Ubuntu
> >> version in my experience. All though mixing stable with testing can
> >> become a pain, mixing testing with unstable shouldn't give you much
> >> troubles normally.
> >> http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?t=15612
> >>
> >> The Debian Multimedia Team is doing most of the audio related packaging
> >> for Debian.
> >> http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia
> >>
> >> For the latest audio software, Arch Linux doesn't give you much more
> >> compared to Debian testing/ unstable in my experience. An advantage of
> >> Debian is that there are more packages available.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> \r
> > Thank you :)
> >
> > to bad that I used Evolution before. I only upgraded Evolution, because
> > Evolution isn't able to import even Emails from another Evolution :(. I
> > needed a workaround and it seems to be, that using equal versions of
> > Evolution is the best I can do.
> >
> > I'll upgrade to testing. If it doesn't work as reliable as needed, then
> > I will reinstall stable.
> >
> > Regarding to reliability (if one gets payed for audio engineering), I
> > don't trust any OS, using any software (just a personal point of view, I
> > know that this opinion can lead to academic discussion ;). For home
> > recording IMO it isn't fatal, if from time to time an app should crash.
> > I just wanted to ensure, that Debian testing already is in a good shape.
> >
> > For me it's the same, "not doing serious stuff these days though", so
> > I'll be venturesome ;).
> Which software is more stable, old or recent software? When it comes to
> audio software, I am sure Debian Testing is more stable then Debian
> Stable, especially when we're moving further in time from the release
> date of Debian Stable.
> An other approach is to backport from Testing/ Unstable to Stable. This
> is what AVLinux and (in the future) OpenDAW does. I don't have
> experience with that situation.
>
> Regards,
> \r

A last time on-list for this thread ;). It's not wanted to write to
distro specific on that list ;). I got mail off-list regarding to this,
and I do understand this point of view. Pardon :)! Unfortunately isn't
Debian users not the right place to ask about audio. So, again sorry.

Back to the topic. Yes, you might be right, a lot of audio apps seems to
become the more stable, the newer the release versions are. Even for
versions from svn/git :).

Thank you,

Ralf

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Thu Jun 2 12:15:02 2011