On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 11:43:45AM -0700, Bill Wohler wrote: > Jules Dubois <email@example.com> writes: > > > 'apt-get upgrade' is restricted (and therefore safer) in that: > > > > under no circumstances are currently installed packages removed, or > > packages not already installed retrieved and installed. > > > > This isn't sufficient for 'unstable', as both of the package-state changes > > above are required regularly. > > RTFM (release notes, actually) tells me that I should use dist-upgrade > when switching distros, but RTFM (that I could find) does not tell me > when to use dist-upgrade when not switching distros. > > How does one know when to use dist-upgrade? Is there an announcement > email somewhere? Does aptitude give some sort of a sign (that I'm > missing)? Is this something that you just run regularly? > > If this is something you run regularly on unstable, then I suppose one > should also run it regularly on testing. Right? In that case, I should > probably run it on my testing systems, eh? Since I had never run > dist-upgrade during the entire sarge lifecycle, this should be > interesting... > > Thanks. > Hi Bill. this is the way I see it. upgrade will never remove some package. dist-upgrade can/will. If you want to install a newer version because of say more functionality, you can 'install' it and that may result in stuff being remove, like dist-upgrade. dist-upgrade will try to get all packages in the same 'distro' (so if a package is now in testing instead of unstable, it will remove that version and get the one in unstable, thus all of your packages will be in unstable, and this may/usually lead to other things begin added and/or remove. Cheers, Kev -- counter.li.org #238656 -- goto counter.li.org and be counted! `$' $' $ $ _ ,d$$$g$ ,d$$$b. $,d$$$b`$' g$$$$$b $,d$$b ,$P' `$ ,$P' `Y$ $$' `$ $ "' `$ $$' `$ $$ $ $$ggggg$ $ $ $ ,$P"" $ $ $ `$g. ,$$ `$$._ _. $ _,g$P $ `$b. ,$$ $ $ `Y$$P'$. `Y$$$$P $$$P"' ,$. `Y$$P'$ $. ,$.
Description: Digital signature