On 2011-10-24 22:33 +0200, Bob Proulx wrote: > Sven Joachim wrote: >> Bob Proulx wrote: >> > Stable typically only needs safe-upgrade. But sometimes for point >> > releases and for some security upgrades will need a dist-upgrade. >> > Testing/Unstable by comparison typically always uses dist-upgrade. >> >> As an unstable user, I beg to disagree. With aptitude there are few >> occasions where dist-upgrade is necessary, and it often does unwanted >> things. > > Since I use apt-get instead of aptitude I am likely missing a nuance > of 'aptitude full-upgrade' (aka 'aptitude dist-upgrade') where it is > different from 'apt-get dist-upgrade'. > > As a Sid user I usually 'apt-get upgrade' first (the safe upgrade) and > then 'apt-get dist-upgrade' second to pick up dependency changes. > Almost every day there will be packages with dependency changes and > will need a dist-upgrade in order to keep current. > >> Unfortunately, apt-get does not have a safe-upgrade command. > > Here I beg to differ. 'apt-get upgrade' is the safe-upgrade mechanism.
Well, it's not. Or it is, but it doesn't work in most cases. > Packages cannot be added or removed This is the problem with it. With "aptitude safe-upgrade", new dependencies are automatically installed, and automatically installed packages are removed if they are no longer needed. This is exactly what you want in the case of library transitions: if libfoo changes its soname, say from libfoo0 to libfoo1, the newly introduced libfoo1 will be installed when a package depends on it, and libfoo0 gets removed when no installed packages depend on it any more. I have never used the dist-upgrade command in aptitude since this safe-upgrade behavior was introduced. Sven -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87lisaw1wp....@turtle.gmx.de
