On Tue, 16 Jun 1998 19:39:36 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>> I love that term, FUD. It implies an untruth. It is true that people
>> have complained about a bo->hamm upgade on this list.
>But you draw the wrong conclusions. I already told you that hamm is not
>released. If there are many severe problems with the upgrade from category
>three above *after* we release hamm, I'm happy to agree with you.
No, I draw an alternate conclusion based on facts and experiences
seperate from your own. We both could go blue in the face (or get advanced
carpal tunnel) defending our stances. I do not think either is wrong. I
just don't agree with the absolutes that all upgrades don't need a reinstall.
>There is the package "cruft" in slink, which will compare dpkg's databases
>with the installed files and print the differences (taking a lot of further
>input into account).
So, you're telling me to use a package in the "unstable" distribution
that is one step beyond the "unstable" distribution that I want to upgrade to
to take care of my installation? ;)
>Those are two different things. Please read again my note about "hamm is not
>released yet". But read also below about exceptions.
Uhm, no. They were about the same thing. Someone wanting to reinstall
from "bo" to "hamm."
>Satisfied?
Nah, just leave it at "There are times when a reinstall is needed."
>In my opinion, a few directories left over do not warrant a reinstall. YMMV.
That was an exmaple.
>"Rhubarb is no Egyptian god." Debian GNU/Linux finger brinkmd@
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Heh, but it makes a tasty pie.
--
Steve C. Lamb | Opinions expressed by me are not my
http://www.calweb.com/~morpheus | employer's. They hired me for my
ICQ: 5107343 | skills and labor, not my opinions!
---------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
