[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: debian 2.2r3 ?



> On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 10:47:09PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote:
> > no.  dist-upgrade is much smarter about dependencies then upgrade
is.
> > i always use dist-upgrade rather then upgrade for that reason.
>
>
> for example if you track unstable or testing you must never use
> apt-get upgrade as it simply doesn't work.  even though you are
> technically not upgrading your `dist' every day, apt-get upgrade is
> still broken quite often in this circumstance.  i choose to simply not
> ever bother with apt-get upgrade in favor of dist-upgrade.

I track unstable/sid and also routinely do "apt-get upgrade" with no
apparent problems. Every once in a while, I'll answer 'no' to doing the
upgrade and then do a "apt-get -u dist-upgrade" and will have the exact
same packages to be updated. Other times it will want to update
different ones.

I must admit that I'm confused... is there much reason to do "upgrade"
vs "dist-upgrade". I get the idea I should start using the latter just
about all the time.

> > I see 16 with apt-get upgrade.
>
> all depends on what you have installed, dist-upgrade and upgrade will
> be the same in this case.  using dist-upgrade is not going to
> magically download sid or woody, nor will it reinstall everything in
> potato.

So that's why "dist-upgrade" sometimes want to add new packages that I
either don't want or don't currently have installed, right ?? I suppose
I could make a note of these packages and then remove them right after
it's finished.

Regards
Hall



Reply to: