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

Re: ye olde upgrade vs. dist-upgrade

On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 02:57:16PM -0700, Thanasis Kinias wrote:
> I wonder the same thing as Marc.

You're not wondering the same thing as me... I know perfectly well what the
two targets do.  It's Bill Moseley who's doing the wondering.

> I always do dist-upgrade also.  Since I also always use -u, I'm not
> worried about its removing or installing things I don't want...

Uh, no, all that does is show you what it's going to do without actually
*doing* it.  It has nothing to do with what you're *allowing* it to do.
Assuming it shows you that it intends to remove a package, or install a new
one... what are you going to do then?  Are you going to still turn it
loose, or are you going to investigate why?

There should never be a reason to need 'dist-upgrade' if you're running

> So, if I'm doing -u to verify all changes, is there any reason _not_ to
> do dist-upgrade for routine upgrades?  

Certainly.  See above.  If you don't want to give apt the power to change
the installation state of a package, you don't use 'dist-upgrade'.  Why
would you give it that power, if it weren't necessary?

 Marc Wilson |     The scene is dull. Tell him to put more life into
 msw@cox.net |     his dying.  -Samuel Goldwyn

Reply to: