Re: "upgrade" vs "dist-upgrade"

[Bob Underwood <mgkrebs1@home.com>]

On Wednesday 31 October 2001 17:57, Viktor Rosenfeld wrote:
> Mike Fontenot wrote:
> > Is my interpretation correct, or have I misunderstood
> > the man page?  (My main concern is that I don't want to
> > accidentally upgrade to woody).
>
> You are mostly correct.  IIRC, if the package structure changes, e.g.
> some packages get split up and others are added, then "upgrade" won't
> handle that and only upgrade the packages you have installed.
> "dist-upgrade" handles this case more intelligently.
>
> However, since the package structure in potato (stable) won't change,
> "dist-upgrade" and "upgrade" have the same effect.  An "upgrade" on
> woody or sid might leave your system broken, though.
>
> So, if you "upgrade" to woody, better use "dist-upgrade".  :)
>
> Cheers,
> Viktor

IIRC, some have suggested a cycle of "upgrade" followed by "dist-upgrade" 
when moving from one distribution to another.  Is there an advantage to this 
as regards split/packages, changed directory structures, etc.?

bob

----------------------------------------
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; charset="us-ascii"; 
name="Attachment: 1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: 
----------------------------------------