o.sinclair at gmail.com
Sat May 5 15:20:39 UTC 2012
On 05/05/12 17:13, Clay Weber wrote:
> On Saturday, May 05, 2012 10:00:48 AM O. Sinclair wrote:
>> On 04/05/12 21:42, Steve Riley wrote:
>>> On 2012-05-04 22:16:19 Georgi Kourtev<gkourtev at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Ah, here i found a good explanation, though it does not state what is
>>>> better. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Packaging_Tool
>>> (...sending again, omitted the list in my response...)
>>> In my experience, "dist-upgrade" is more complete than "upgrade," because
>>> it can handle cases where dependencies bring in new packages that don't
>>> already exist.
>>> For example, say you currently have package foo:1.0 installed. foo:1.0 has
>>> no dependencies. Now it's time to upgrade to foo:1.1, and this version
>>> has a new dependency on bar:0.9. "apt-get upgrade" will hold foo back,
>>> because bar is currently not installed on your machine. "apt-get
>>> dist-upgrade" includes a dependency resolver and will not only upgrade
>>> foo:1.0 to foo:1.1 but also install bar:0.9.
>> for an upgrade of KDE dist-upgrade should not be necessary as it does
>> not involve kernel etc. I did mine via normal upgrade and all went well.
>> I suspect a problem with local mirrors or some earlier upgrade not
> Incorrect, as upgrading to KDE 4.8.3 requires a couple of new packages to be
> installed. A stock setup may not require it, but it is quite possible some
> added KDE bits may need some.
In which case I think kubuntu.org would have told you that dist-upgrade
is/was necessary. For me it was not. And I can at least not remember
that a KDE x.x.x upgrade ever was.
More information about the kubuntu-users