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

Re: Dist-upgrade or upgrade. Which?

On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 06:41:43PM +0100, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> > > I always use dist-upgrade but there's not a lot a choose. Upgrade
> > > upgrades installed packages while dist-upgrade can make more
> > > significant changes. Once Wheezy becomes stable the two should do
> > > the same thing. However, I prefer to stay in the habit of using
> > > dist-upgrade (or full-upgrade for aptitude).  
> > 
> > The point is, you are *SAFER* using upgrade. Using dist-upgrade can
> > remove half your sysytem before you can say OMG!
> > 
> > I recommend that new users follow Jochen's advice.
> This might only apply to Ubuntu but I am sure I have had packages such
> as kernels with security related updates that needed dist-upgrade to
> install.

I don't use Ubuntu, so wouldn't know. This may happen, sure. In that
case it is obvious. But I think you are missing the point as to why it
is better to do an upgrade first *THEN IF NECESSARY* do dist-upgrade.

> So perhaps safer isn't quite the right word.

No. safer is the right word! 

"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the 
oppressing." --- Malcolm X

Reply to: