Re: hamm upgrade using dselect
paul@wau.mis.ah.nl (Paul Slootman) wrote on 26.02.98 in <19980226083856.04308@wau.mis.ah.nl>:
> On Wed 25 Feb 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > >>"Paul" == Paul Slootman <paul@wau.mis.ah.nl> writes:
> > Paul> On Wed 25 Feb 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
> > >> I think we should obsolete that method. Mountable, which does
> > >> everything that mounted does, and more, is much nicer, in that it
> > >> checks MD5SUMS and does more than a simepl dpkg -BORGiE
> >
> > Paul> It also demands that the filesystem is not mounted, else it
> > Paul> barfs when it tries to mount it itself. That's not always an
> > Paul> option, and sometimes a pain. Or at least that was when I tried
> > Paul> that last.
> >
> > Say what? I always have my mirror partition mounted, and it
> > never barfs. You must have a local configuration error, or possibly
> > are not using hamm yet.
>
> Hmmm, I'll take your word for it. It went horribly wrong the couple of
> times I tried it before (must have been bo), so that I never felt
> tempted to use it again.
Worked perfectly for me even in bo. However, I think it also had
predepends problems on any version I ever used.
> I'll give it a go next time I try an install. BTW, what's the relevance
> in distinguishing between "cdrom" and "mountable", besides the FS type?
> I'd suggest that both should mount the FS readonly...
"mountable" is a new method. "cdrom" and "mounted" (and some more) come
with dpkg. "mountable" _should_ obsolete those.
MfG Kai
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: