Dual-Linux boot

[Ben Pfaff]

Edward Glowacki <glowack2@msu.edu> writes:

> I was looking for stuff on AFS and Debian and while staring at the
> "stable" and "unstable" labels attached to various packages, I
> thought about doing a "stable" and an "unstable" install on my
> laptop when it arrives.
> 
> Basically do a very minimum install, get all the hardware working,
> but don't add much in the way of packages.  Call that the "stable"
> version.  Clone it, then start installing stuff on the "unstable"
> version.  Some stuff would could quickly be added to "stable" but
> other stuff you may want to test out first.  For example, say you
> want to try to play DVD's, you find a couple of different packages
> and install them *all* to see which one you like best.  But in
> installing one of the crappy DVD players, you updated some libraries
> which are now incompatable with your web browser!  Even uninstalling
> the bad DVD player won't fix it.

I'm not sure that this extreme of an approach is necessary,
especially with the new version of apt (the one in
testing/unstable that has "super cow powers").  With this version
you can install selected packages from unstable even if you're
running stable or testing.

Reinstalling older versions might be a problem, I guess, but it's
pretty rare in practice and I haven't had to do it in the last
couple of years.  (I run unstable all the time on my Debian boxes
and update frequently.)
-- 
"To the engineer, the world is a toy box full of sub-optimized and
 feature-poor toys."
--Scott Adams