Re: Upgrade to latest Inkscape
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Upgrade to latest Inkscape
- From: Kelly Clowers <email@example.com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 18:09:08 -0700
- Message-id: <[🔎] AANLkTin9=V9DMrbuNfZihkRQ6=AoUhqw+OfHqHyxxspL@mail.gmail.com>
- In-reply-to: <20100831205942.GA7549@hysteria.proulx.com>
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <AANLkTimBbgZuMNKPOSqULd_8aBQQ7gFJJaZYJoDWqck1@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinQcFL=FL1wnp0hG-gp2X9ooau-igd=yd6Y8HJY@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTim_TXqRa8Nsa7++RBOi7KYpdtodf3=BSO6s9NLD@mail.gmail.com> <20100831205942.GA7549@hysteria.proulx.com>
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 13:59, Bob Proulx <email@example.com> wrote:
> Kelly Clowers wrote:
>> James Stuckey wrote:
>> > You shouldn't do it like this. If you do, you very well may end up with an
>> > unstable system.
>> What? Why would it be unstable?
> For one it would then be "Unstable", as in the daily Debian Unstable
> build. As in Unstable, Testing, Stable. Here is a reference to
> Debian release tracks.
Oh, just the names? I realized 3 or 4 years ago that there is no point
in being afraid of unstable or experimental just because of the names.
I guess they might be unstable enough to bother some people.
> But the real problem with upgrading by the method described is that
> you will probably end up with an unbootable system. That would be
> another definition of unstable. This next upgrade will require
> specific actions to successfully upgrade. Such as upgrading the
> kernel first, rebooting, then upgrading the rest of the system. See
> several of the recent discussion threads talking about the upgrade
> process from Lenny to Squeeze to get the details.
Yeah, I guess I forgot about that silly transition issue. Probably
because I tend to just upgrade with aptitude interactive, and even
I do manage to get an unbootable system, it is easy enough to
recover it with a live cd.