On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 05:34:39PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 12:21:39PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: > >> > 1. why is this allegedly a 'benefit'? what's so special about libraries? > >> > why is a new libc6 or libssl etc more scary than a new apache or php > >> > etc?
> >> - because it's much harder to go back > > are you talking theory or practice here? because IN PRACTICE, it isn't. > > i've upgraded and downgraded packages at will with no particular > > difficulty. even libc6 on occasion. > I must admit that I don't have much experience in downgrading. But at > least in theory it must be easier if it involves less packages... For my part, I am very much cognizant that I have written maintainer scripts that do not smoothly support downgrades -- because it would have been significant extra effort to get it right, and downgrades are not supported. (Well, there was that one NMU of libapache2-mod-perl2 which supports downgrading, but that fell out as a freebie when implementing proper support for all the documented maintainer script use cases in the policy manual. ;) -- 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/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
