John Griffiths said: > But won't you need to do a dist-upgrade when the as-yet-unamed next unstable > comes out? so isn't it better to keep going on the dist name? and keep track > of developments?
Nope. On the day that potato froze, 'unstable' and 'frozen' were identical (as far as I noticed, anyhow) and they diverged from there. Personally, I never use dist-upgrade. The difference between upgrade and dist-upgrade appears to be primarily in their handling of removed/replaced packages. e.g., I did an apt-get upgrade on a box that's still running Navigator 4.73 yesterday and the navigator package was held back, while a dist-upgrade would have removed navigator-473 and replaced it with navigator-475. My preference is to handle those situations myself (apt-get install navigator) instead of keeping it fully automated. If your preference differs, you should be safe to always use dist-upgrade. > WARNING - > This email is confidential and may contain copyright material. ... > Republication or re-dissemination, including posting to news groups or web > pages, is strictly prohibited without the express prior consent of Capital > Monitor Pty Ltd. Uh-oh... Looks like someone at Debian is in trouble... -- "Two words: Windows survives." - Craig Mundie, Microsoft senior strategist "So does syphillis. Good thing we have penicillin." - Matthew Alton Geek Code 3.1: GCS d- s+: a- C++ UL++$ P+>+++ L+++>++++ E- W--(++) N+ o+ !K w---$ O M- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t 5++ X+ R++ tv b+ DI++++ D G e* h+ r++ y+
