Re: apt-get upgrade dies badly ...
On Wed, 3 Nov 1999, Paul Slootman wrote:
> I don't think that's a problem; somehow force the version of the libc
> on the base system to be lower than the one in potato at the time of
> release; it'll automatically be replaced then.
That's easy. I can force it to be a .99 rev right below the final
> Maybe a specific runtime-ONLY libc package is called for? And if you
> install the -dev package, the non-stripped library gets installed?
It would take extra disk space due to diversions. It would also be a
pain. I'd rather just keep things the way they are and enable stripping
on the final debs for the install disks.
> One general note on the base system (not alpha specific): I think it
> would be good if ALL base system packages would be "refreshed" from
> the archive once the package install phase is started; that way the
> base system could be stripped of more things, e.g. /usr/doc (or was
> it /usr/share/doc :-).
I agree. It's kind of a waste of space to do otherwise.