Paul E Condon wrote: > On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 04:22:08PM -0700, Willie Wonka wrote:
> Stop! You need to read documentation on apt-get and aptitude before you go > any further in changing your system. There are situations in which following > piecemeal advice, as you are getting in prior post, will break your system. Hi Paul, and all the others who've taken time to reply ;-) I'm been very busy with my Day job (non-computer related). > Your system seems to be working now. I believe this because you are able > to post messages and read messages on this list. Yes it is indeed! ....and yes I can. > So, what is it about your > system that you want to change and why? I would like to use the latest version of 'hdparm' -- because it has some recent changes that may help me debug... specifically the bugs/update for the -I option. <http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/system/hardware/!INDEX.html> viewing the LSM file yields the changelogs; =============================== Begin4 Title: hdparm Version: 6.6 Entered-date: 2006-03-07 Description: hdparm - get/set hard disk parameters for Linux IDE drives. v6.6 fix build on Redhat/Fedora v6.5 fix -I bugs introduced in v6.4 v6.4 major update for -I, bug fix for -C v6.3 report ATA revisions > 7 v6.2 major rework of ATA Security Commands v6.1 bug fix for BLKGETSIZE [...] =============================== > I detect a lot of faulty 'knowledge' > in you[r] post. I certainly hope not "a lot". There's certainly some confusion (especially on my part) > Read the doc.s. In particular read man pages to learn why you > need both update and upgrade. Do not rely on /etc/debian_version to tell you > what version of debian you are running. It is a user controlled file. Once > it is installed in the initial install, it is not changed by the apt-get > system. Ok -- I still presume that "apt-get upgrade" will bring me up to 3.1r2? Perhaps I'm mistaken? For this install -- I *did* use CD #1(of 14) from the 3.1r1 release; everything there-after has been d/l from the Internet -- NO "testing" entries were in any files, _prior_to_yesterday_ , so if/when reviewing the relevant entries in /etc/apt/preferences and /etc/apt/sources.list (upthread), just disregard the "testing"...(disregard anything related to 'testing'), up until this point. I did however perform the 1st "upgrade" ever, on this install, early yesterday morning using this one entry for "testing"; ~$ cat /etc/apt/preferences Package: * Pin: release a=testing Pin-Priority: 50 I used the -s option (before the actual upgrade) in 'apt-get', to view the differences that would've occured... and it *seems* the entry above made no difference (or only an extrememly minor diff). I am so concerned with not being understood now, that I can't really recall. > If your sources.list points to sarge or stable, you are running the current > stable, which is sarge. Yep ;-) > The r-number in the version is not really important > to the user of a functioning stable system. Trust me, I know -- I've broken many-a-'Stable'-system in the past (my own) -- and no, I'm not trolling, and I'm not a sadist -- I like to play with things, I like to (try to) understand them. But please don't let that info keep anyone from telling me how to upgrade an application. > You get the latest version of > whatever package you want by downloading from a repository on the web. The > r-number tells you what revision level a debian CD was written at. If you > have web access, which I think you do, you stop using your install CDs as > soon as you have functioning web access. I did... I have broadband access, and have always used the inet for 'updates'. Until yesterday, I have not performed any 'upgrades'. > Are you now running stable or testing or what? Stable!, Stable!, ala horses -- <jk> ;-) > This matters as to what advice > you should be given, and it's not clear which you are running, although I > suspect you are running stable, because r-numbers are not assigned to testing > or unstable. You are corr-ect sir! (spoken like Ed McMahon, on "The Tonight Show" 'with Johnny Carson' saying that) > Next, what do you want to be running? Stable (with a sprinkling of "Testing"). > Why do you want to change? Because certain Application bugs have been worked out, and the misinformation given from certain hardware utilities will go a long way in helping decipher what's actually occuring with my hardware. Debugging my "Stable" install, for one, and then later building my own Kernel. > Giving good advice requires that one knows what you want. From what > I've read so far, your desire for change is driven only by a > misunderstanding of what the r-number means. I would say that you are misunderstanding what I am asking for - I could care less what the 'r' (Release) number is - I'm much more concerned on how to "Pin" appropriately....but since I've noticed 'r2' is now Sarge (and has been for a few months) I might as well ask that question too. Back to my questions about /pinning/.... I'm having a little trouble understanding the "priority" numbers that one sets when adding entries in the /etc/apt/preferences file. Before yesterday, there were '0' entries in that file on this system...it was blank. As an aside; would not "upGRADING" bring me up to 3.1r2?. My goal is that I would like to *upgrade* _some_ applications. Right now, only just one app., 'hdparm'. This install is not a mission-critical File-server, and I would dearly like to keep it up and running, but perhaps I should just move the whole system up to Testing, if I can't work out this *pin priority* stuff. Thank you for your concern and your input Paul , and Thanks to all the others who've replied. Regards __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
