Re: FW: Help! I broke it!
On Thu, 1 May 2003, Daniel L. Miller wrote:
> My installation path thus far was Woody ISO to CD-ROM's, and install
> from CD - then upgrade my packages via "updates", "testing", and <gulp>
> "unstable" via "apt-get dist-upgrade".
If you want to end up with a pure "unstable" box, and you are doing it
all in one sesssion, you can skip the "updates" and "testing" upgrades.
I like having both testing and unstable in sources.list, just 'cause
it makes it easy to do "apt-get --reinstall install <package>/testing"
when unstable lives up to its name (otherwise you need to edit
sources.list, do an update, then re-install the broken package).
If you are using a slow/flakey dialup you may want to only list one
archive in sources.list (an update of testing *and* unstable takes
~35min @ 28.8kbps).
> If this is a terrible idea, please give a written slap - preferably with
> an explanation why.
How good an idea it is depends on what you are doing with the box.
You probably don't want to run a business off an unstable system
unless you have a really good backroom to audit new stuff before it is
made available to the staff; a computer hobbiest is likely to think it
is the ideal system. <shrug>
> Now, after applying these upgrades - am I running on Sarge/Sid? Or am I
> running Woody with some individual packages that are newer?
Officially, you are running what /etc/debian_version says you are;
practically, it depends on what is in /etc/apt/sources.list.
Most likely you will end up with all Sid, or a mix of Sid and Sarge
(depending on sources.list); there could be leftovers from Woody, but
they would be the result of buggy packaging (and hopefully fixed by
the time testing moves to stable :-).