Re: ye olde upgrade vs. dist-upgrade
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 02:57:16PM -0700, Thanasis Kinias wrote:
> I wonder the same thing as Marc.
You're not wondering the same thing as me... I know perfectly well what the
two targets do. It's Bill Moseley who's doing the wondering.
> I always do dist-upgrade also. Since I also always use -u, I'm not
> worried about its removing or installing things I don't want...
Uh, no, all that does is show you what it's going to do without actually
*doing* it. It has nothing to do with what you're *allowing* it to do.
Assuming it shows you that it intends to remove a package, or install a new
one... what are you going to do then? Are you going to still turn it
loose, or are you going to investigate why?
There should never be a reason to need 'dist-upgrade' if you're running
stable.
> So, if I'm doing -u to verify all changes, is there any reason _not_ to
> do dist-upgrade for routine upgrades?
Certainly. See above. If you don't want to give apt the power to change
the installation state of a package, you don't use 'dist-upgrade'. Why
would you give it that power, if it weren't necessary?
--
Marc Wilson | The scene is dull. Tell him to put more life into
msw@cox.net | his dying. -Samuel Goldwyn
Reply to: