on Fri, May 21, 2004 at 12:46:59PM -0700, Karsten M. Self (kmself@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
> I just found my Galeon install inadvertantly updated (I can't say
> upgraded) from 1.2.x (9ish?) to 1.3.14a-1. This despite its being
> listed as "hold" in dpkg --get-selections:
>
> galeon hold
>
> I've got major reservations with where Galeon's gone in the 1.3 branch,
> most of which I feel is a major step backwards. Needless to say, I'm
> not particularly pleased. I don't believe I can force a revision to the
> prior version, though I'll look into that.
>
>
> This corresponds to my switching from doing 'apt-get -yu dist-upgrade'
> to 'aptitude -yu dist-upgrade'. I noted a lot of packages getting
> updated under aptitude that weren't being changed with apt-get. The
> galeon situation is one of the more annoying of these changes.
>
>
> This also calls for the possibility of Debian treating major revisions of
> packages as separate packages. This is already done with several
> development tools (gcc, perl, python, etc.). While desktop / end-user
> apps don't fall quite under the same category, being able to manage this
> change more precisely could be useful.
Turns out to be a two year old bug. This colors my opinion of aptitude
very negatively:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=146207
One of the core strengths of Debian is that it does what I tell it to do
(if doing so doesn't break things horribly -- and even then, it just
questions my sanity and does so anyhow if I insist).
Having user preferences silently and irrevocably overridden is pretty
bad.
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
The black hat community is drooling over the possibility of a secure
execution environment that would allow applications to run in a
secure area which cannot be attached to via debuggers.
- Jason Spence, on Palladium aka NGCSB aka "Trusted Computing"
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature