Re: Is this really the right thing to do?

[Ed Cogburn <ecogburn@greene.xtn.net>]

Leandro Dutra wrote:
> 
> > >     This feature would, I fear, strain the dpkg system even more.  I'm
> > > starting to see occasional failures under dselect/apt/dpkg that
> > > fortunately, for now, are transient (i.e. rerun dselect/apt and the
> > > failure doesn't reoccur).  It suggests to me that we are pushing our
> > > package management software beyond its capability.
> >
> >   I have put off continuning client changeover from slackware to
> > debian due to these same concerns.  Not to mention the condition of
> > the current slink.
> 
>         I do not know exactly which failures are these... but I
> notice most of the problems with packages in the list are
> because people aren't using the stable (hamm) version.
> 
>         Sure you can use unstable (potato) or frozen (slink). But
> they are not intended for general use, so in production or
> end-use environments you shouldn't be using slink anyway. If
> you use the distributions as they are intended, the stable
> will be one of the best (more reliable, robust) Linux systems
> available!
> 
>         I would suggest that, as apt is still in development, these
> failures in non-stable environments should be expected.  But
> based on the history of Debian, they will surely have been fixed
> when slink replaces hamm as the stable distribution.
> 
> Leandro Guimaraens Faria Corcete Dutra
> Amdocs Brasil Ltda
> 


	I agree that people using slink should expect problems when updating
their system with it.  I've seen many of those problems (the
__register__frame_info problem recently), but some of the problems
aren't related to the packages.  I occasionally see a "general
protection failure"  (or something similar) message that starts with a
string of zeros.  As long as they are transient, they are not serious
(but indicate a weakness in dpkg) and are not easily trackable. 
Unfortunately, I haven't seen this recently so I can't be more specific.


-- 
Ed C.