Re: Special upgrade rules from rex->bo->hamm
On 23 Jan 1998 bruce@va.debian.org wrote:
> > I don't think we can autodetect the case when someone wants to do a full
> > upgrade
>
> Postulate we put a package "debian-release" in the distribution.
> We only bump its version number for major releases.
> Something in Deity looks for that, and if it finds a newer debian-release
> available, tells the user that an upgrade of Debian is available and
> presents a dialogue asking if the user wishes to perform a major upgrade.
> If you pop in a new CD and run Deity, you'd get this dialogue.
Novel idea, but it doesn't solve the general problem of upgrading
everything. It might serve to nicely aide the end users but developers
would still need the 'Upgrade All' button we discussed to keep up with
unstable.
It is a good idea to warn users that they are about to perform a major
upgrade. I would vastly prefer that the package files are tagged with a
name to putting fake packages in. Ie the 'hamm' packages file would be
called 'hamm 2.0 unstable' right now and later be promoted to 'hamm 2.0
stable' (or some sort of variation of the above)
Then deity could detect when dists/stable/Packages changes from 'bo' to
'hamm' (or even that the version number changed) and notify the user that
a major upgrade is avaiable.
> This would be more elegant if package scripts were able to perform package
> selection, and if Deity would check for changes in the selections after
> running a script. Then you would not need "special" logic, you'd be able
> to install a magic package that would do something to your package state.
Hmmm.. It would require somehow getting the script into the machine and
then providing a script interface to the dependancy engine.. I'm not sure
what it would gain though. (example?)
Your magic package is pretty interesting. If we put conflicts and depends
lines on it then it will be able to manipulate the package state simply by
installing it. Automatic removal and installation will occur just as if it
were a normal package.
Jason
Reply to: