On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 11:36:10AM -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> Maintaining a system properly is, of course, subjective. If you use a
> volatile system and don't regularly upgrade, then you will have to face
> a massive upgrade and be prepared for the consequences. I bet those
> consequences are minimal at this time. My choice of words was
> unfortunate. I should have said something like "if you aren't prepared
> to handle the massive upgrades involved in a more volatile system,
> maybe you should be running a less volatile one."
I think that rather than letting aptitude loose to do everything
it wants in one fell swoop, it might be more conservative to start
with an
apt-get update && apt-get upgrade
to get the easier updates done first, and then if that goes well
follow up with a hopefully smaller
apt-get dist-upgrade
to deal with the remainder in a separate run.
Then I can try running aptitude and hopefully it will have stopped
crashing and can tell me what else it thinks is left to be done....
One of the things that bothered me about what aptitude wanted to do
was that it included several packages it threatened to remove because
they were 'no longer used'. I don't know how it decided this, as the
list included packages like 'xv' and 'xearth' which I explicitly
installed and definately use quite regularly....
Regards,
DigbyT
--
Digby R. S. Tarvin digbyt(at)digbyt.com
http://www.digbyt.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
