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

Re: Dist-upgrade or upgrade. Which?

On 04/21/2013 09:30 PM, Chris Bannister wrote:
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

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!

where safe means idiot-proof, but not vandal-proof?

Reply to: