[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Upgrading to etch.

Luis Matos schrieb:
>> Upgrading sarge to etch, without backports isn't easy.  They've been 
>> rewriting the release notes for months now trying to get a clean upgrade 
>> path (I think they think they are there now).  It looks as if it's a lot 
>> more difficult than just changing the sources.list entry.
> lol ... the question here is not to have a clean upgrade (it's seems
> impossible), but to find a way where users *can* upgrade.
> For example, if versions of packages in bpo are higher that the ones in
> etch, the upgrade simply breaks... you can advice the users before they
> come here and start asking for how to solve this.

So this leads to the conclusions

(a) let's have no higher versions in sarge-backports than in etch


(b) if having higher versions in sarge-backports than in etch we
    need to provide the very same packages of higher versions
    than etch also as packages built for Etch in etch-backports
    *and* we need to advise the users to replace sarge by etch
    /everywhere/ in the sources.list (generalized under the
    assumption that users have plain sarge + bpo in their

Both ways are possible, but clearly (a) is much easier to support.


Reply to: