On Saturday 02 July 2005 09:40, Bill Wohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
> Jules Dubois <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> You're misinterpreting what 'dist-upgrade' does. > > If I am, you haven't answered my original question ;-). Your original statement implied it was it was not useful to use the 'dist-upgrade' command when you're not "upgrading" distributions. My answer was: man apt-get man aptitude Both of these man pages describe the difference between 'upgrade' and 'dist-upgrade'. > Which is, Why would you want to use dist-upgrade when you're not switching > distributions? I'm curious. I feel like answering RTFM again, but you've been reasonable and polite. Thank you for your courtesy. 'apt-get upgrade' is restricted (and therefore safer) in that: under no circumstances are currently installed packages removed, or packages not already installed retrieved and installed. This isn't sufficient for 'unstable', as both of the package-state changes above are required regularly. 'aptitude upgrade' works slightly differently but is still similarly limited. So, instead of 'upgrade', users of 'unstable' and 'testing' must use (1) 'dist-upgrade'; or, for "manual" upgrades, (2) 'install <package-name>' for some package upgrades (or forego those upgrades if they so desire). I think that 'stable' never requires it, except, as the name 'dist-upgrade' suggests, in the case of of upgrading to a new release (such as from Woody to Sarge) -- it's been several years since I ran 'stable' (Potato), and perhaps I don't remember correctly. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
