scripsit Bill Moseley:
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 11:13:22PM -0800, Marc Wilson wrote:
[snip]
> > 'upgrade' - apt CAN'T change a package's installation state
> > 'dist-upgrade' - apt CAN change a package's installation state
[snip]
> Therefore, it's been my assumption that in that case dist-upgrade and
> upgrade act in the same way. Someone commented that dist-upgrade is
> the wrong thing to use for security updates, but I'm not clear if
> that's because of their different environment ("stable" vs. "woody in
> sources.list) or something else that is not clear to me from the docs.
I wonder the same thing as Marc. I always do dist-upgrade also. Since
I also always use -u, I'm not worried about its removing or installing
things I don't want... So, if I'm doing -u to verify all changes, is
there any reason _not_ to do dist-upgrade for routine upgrades?
--
Pax vobiscum; pax cum omnibus.
Thanasis Kinias
tkinias at asu.edu
Doctoral Student, Department of History
Arizona State University
Tempe, Arizona, U.S.A.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
