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

Re: HowTo for Gnome2??

On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 08:10:37 -0600
"John W. M. Stevens" <john@betelgeuse.us> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 10:13:24PM -0500, Todd Pytel wrote:
> > I backed up my sources.list,
> OK . . .
> > changed it to unstable,
> "It"?  Did you mean the APT::Default-Release value?

I guess so - I don't know the proper Debian terminology.  I switched
"testing" for "unstable"

> > did an apt-get update, apt-get install gnome-core,
> OK.
> > and then restored the old sources.list.
> There isn't a command line option for specifying this?  I thought that
> was what -t, --target-release and --default-release were for?

Perhaps.  I didn't say that this was the only way to do it.  

> > Works fine.  Nautilus 2 is worlds faster than the
> > original, fonts are nice, everything is anti-aliased, blah, blah,
> > blah...
> OK.
> > If you're absolutely opposed to any unstable packages, then I
> > guess you're screwed.  That's what you get for running testing.
> What, are you saying that I'm less likely to get screwed by running
> experimental, than testing?
> I didn't know that.  Why?

No, what I'm saying is that if you run testing, you can't always expect
that packages will play well together.  It's an automated distribution,
so you get strange results when one package is held up by a dependency
or unstable has switched to a new major version.  In this case, that
means either 1) putting a hold on the GNOME packages until all of them
are in testing, or 2) getting the other core GNOME 2 packages from
unstable.  If you just moved to testing in the last 2 weeks, then it's
probably too late for #1, since some 1.4 packages are already out of
your package lists. That leaves #2. That's life in Testing. GNOME 2 may
be the first time you've hit odd release problems like this, but it will
probably not be your last.


Reply to: