Re: post-release package update policy
On 28 Oct 1995, Kai Henningsen wrote:
> email@example.com (Dale Scheetz) wrote on 26.10.95 in
> > > [...]
> > > > Product is. While trying to build a system, dpkg changed enough to loose
> > > > it's old database (rather than provide a conversion) and "forgot" that
> > > > it had installed the base package. When I went to remidy that problem,
> > > > the only
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > That's a bad experience all right, but I just don't see how having a non-
> > > changing release would have avoided it.
> > Well, I do! It would have given me the opportunity to fall back to the
> > "release" package anytime I install an updated package that, for one
> > reason or another, fails to opperate to my liking.
> Why do you think this wouldn't have hapened with the "release" package?
Because the base package that WAS installed (even though dpkg didn't know
it was) was working fine at the time I upgraded to the "new" base
package. If that had been the "release" version, and were available on
the ftp site, I could have simply reinstalled it.
> Why could you not go back to whatever package you had installed
It was originaly obtained via winsock ftp tranfered to floppy and
installed. The floppies were never expected to hold the data for longer
than was necessary to tranfer it and are no longer available.
Now that I have a working system, I am learning what I need to keep and
what I can safely throw away. I am also getting farther away from the
time when these issues were of primary importance and significant impact
on my time. I can still remember enough though, that I continue to make
these points in the hope that we can make getting here easier for those
yet to arrive.
> Sorry, but I don't think your problem had anything at all to do with
> whatever is labelled a release.
If this doesn't make it any clearer, I don't know what else to say.
- MTA problem
- From: "Bernd S. Brentrup" <firstname.lastname@example.org>