On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 10:04:47AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Fri, 11 Nov 2005, Bill Allombert wrote: > > Whatever you choose to do, you need to take care of partial upgrade.
> Not across released stable versions! Since when do we support > stable/stable+1 mixed systems? Since always? It is always expected that, within reason, if a package's dependencies are satisfied by a given system, that package will function. This definitely includes partial upgrades between stable and stable+1... among other things, this is necessary to ensure that a *full* upgrade between one stable release and the next doesn't fail due to packages being upgrade out of order. > Besides, depends/pre-depends and conflicts should be more than enough if > done right. Yes, this is what is meant by supporting partial upgrades. "Supporting partial upgrades" doesn't mean "any given package should be upgradable on its own without upgrading any others"; it means "no apt-get install command should be able to break the system". > New shadow would conflict with ALL packages that do not support the new > syntax Unfortunately, yes; and we saw plenty of occasions in woody->sarge where conflicts with old packages made the upgrade path more difficult than it should have been... -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
