Le 14/05/2017 à 16:10, fsmithred a écrit :
On 05/13/2017 11:03 AM, Steve Litt wrote:
On Sat, 13 May 2017 01:06:38 -1000
Joel Roth <jo...@pobox.com> wrote:
Long before three weeks ago. I don't usually upgrade or
dist-upgrade unless there is some particular need.
Probably I'm not alone, even if that is not considered
best practice.
I never dist-upgrade. From what I hear, it breaks things. If I feel the
need to dist-upgrade, it's probably time to back up, reformat the
disks, and clean-install a later version.
SteveT
I always do dist-upgrade on stable. The aptitude equivalent is
full-upgrade. For curiosity, I just did 'apt-get upgrade' on an
installation that hasn't been upgraded in a long time. Following that with
'apt-get dist-upgrade' shows me that I would have missed getting
firefox-esr without dist-upgade.
When I've compared upgrade to dist-upgrade (or aptitude safe-upgrade vs.
full-upgrade) in the past, they are usually the same in the stable
release. In Testing, it's good to do them separately to prevent breakage.
I suppose this is the difference between "normal upgrade" and
"smart upgrade" in Synaptic. 'smart' means it is allowed to install new
packages to satisfy dependencies, like "dist-upgrade".
When you click upgrade-all in Synaptic, it will use the method you
have selected as default (normal-upgrade, in my case), but if you
explicitely ask to upgrade a package, then it performs a smart-upgrade
but only to satisfy the dependencies of this very selected package.
I would be afraid to run a dist-upgrade on the whole distro every
month or so.
Concerning your example, I retained Iceweasel for severall months
because the only thing I expected from FF-ESR was more bloat. I
eventually let it "upgrade" to FF-ESR after a few months because it
seemed to get into trouble.
Didier
_______________________________________________
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
