On 2017-06-26 at 14:27, David Wright wrote: > On Mon 26 Jun 2017 at 19:01:21 (+0100), Brian wrote: > >> On Mon 26 Jun 2017 at 13:06:29 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>>> Probably because (s)he read the release notes: >>> >>> <https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#minimal-upgrade> >> >> The notes are clear but what is the point of following this >> procedure? >> >> You do an upgrade, so an upgrade is done. No new packages. Fair >> enough. > > I have a desktop that I don't use very frequently at the moment. Last > time I booted it up, the apt-get upgrade downloaded over 70 packages. > There was probably a point-release involved. That contrasts with my > regularly used machines that apt-get -d upgrade every three hours and > email me if their cache contains any packages. I understood "No new packages." to mean "no not-previously-installed packages get installed", not "no new versions of existing packages get installed". > If you watch upgrades taking place, you can see that they're phased. > Apt-ish and Dpkg-ish are setup before other packages are unpacked, > and so on. It's not all just done in one heap. > > By running upgrade before dist-upgrade, you reduce complexity by > maximising the compatibility of packages with each other. When lenny > was replaced by squeeze, even these two steps were insufficient; the > kernel and udev needed replacing as a pair after the (lenny) upgrade > and before the (squeeze) dist-upgrade. This is my interpretation of (one major reason for) the recommendation, as well. -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
