Re: dselect oddities
On Fri, 15 May 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Fri, 15 May 1998 11:04:55 -0500 (CDT), Nathan E Norman wrote:
>
> >But isn't that the point of a packaging system? This way, bug-fixes,
> >security fixes, etc. are integrated into the system simply by running
> >dselect every now and then. deselect *does* present you with a list of
> >what it's going to update (or more correctly, updated packages).
>
> Right, and the person should *CHOOSE* which packages are to be updated.
> This automatatic unless otherwise specified path reaks of Microsoft.
>
> >If you want everything on hold, then place everything on hold :)
>
> That is not feesable for 2-300 packages.
Go to the select screen, hit 'o', go to the top of the updated packages
section (the header), hit '='. There, all the updated packages are on
hold.
> >I'm not trying to be flippant, but you still haven't listed a specific
> >example of where the default behavior is wrong, so I'm not sure where
> >you're coming from.
>
> Yes, I have. Placing unstable directories into the path to keep up with
> current versions of applications while not having to worry about other things
> being updated. IE, having the *OPTION* to choose to upgrade, not to upgrade
> outright.
That's what placing packages on hold is good for. There are simple ways
of marking everything on hold if you want to. Don't change the documented
and standard behavior, I assure you that I'll be very put out if dselect
suddenly stops upgrading my system when I run it.
--
Scott K. Ellis <storm@gate.net> http://www.gate.net/~storm/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: