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: