Re: Is the stable/unstable split broken?
On 29 Jan 2001, Brian May wrote:
> Matthew> If you're thinking of creating a meta-package called
> Matthew> 'stable' which depends on the stable version of every
> Matthew> package, typing apt-get upgrade stable will install every
>
> How big would the depends: line get? then again, don't answer that...
OK, I won't.
> Matthew> single package listed therein. Does anyone else have a
> Matthew> problem with that?
>
> I suppose that is meant to be the difference between
>
> apt-get upgrade stable
>
> and
>
> apt-get install stable
Duh. Of course. apt-get upgrade doesn't repair dependancies, does it.
But still, if you've got the 'stable' meta-package installed, and then
decide to 'dist-upgrade' - suddenly you're wondering why it's asking for all
three CDs and listing stuff you've never heard of...
> <yuck scream="ARgghhh!" protection="Runs for cover"/>
Indeed...
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
#include <disclaimer.h>
Matthew Palmer
mjp16@uow.edu.au
Reply to: