Manually update a library? And a GetDeb question?

[Julien Lavergne]

Usually, installing something from GetDeb is a bad idea, and installing 
a library from them is a very very bad idea (considering that even some 
Debian devs do bad stuff with library, I can't imagine how bad GetDeb 
can handle them ...).
Also, upgrading a library localy (as you suggest) is also a bad idea, 
because you need to check the incompatibility that could be introduced, 
and maybe rebuild every packages which depend on it. Dealing with 
packaging of a  library is a very dangerous game for the stability of 
the system. Also, don't assume the new (and probably unstable judging by 
the version number) version will solve all your problems by magic

Regards,
Julien Lavergne

Le 05/02/2013 23:05, John Hupp a écrit :
> On I'm running Quantal, I've been wanting and waiting to solve a 
> camera control problem and feel that the latest release of libgphoto2 
> (v2.5.1) will probably do the job.
>
> But the version installed (the highest available) from the official 
> repo is 2.4.x.
>
> I'm imagining that if I do a manual upgrade and the available repo 
> release catches up to 2.5.x at some point, that this will not be be a 
> problem.  Anyone confirm?
>
> --------------------
>
> A related question with the GetDeb source.  (BTW, GetDeb is back up 
> and running after being down for a LONG time.) The related camera 
> control software is now at version 0.5.x and has several critical 
> fixes, but the GetDeb available version is 0.4.x.
>
> First of all, does it me anything for my Quantal installation that the 
> prescribed source apt line in the manualinstallation instructions is: 
> deb http://archive.getdeb.net/ubuntu precise-getdeb apps (rather than 
> *quantal-getdeb*)?
>
> Next, I recall that if I manually install anapp rather than using, 
> say, a Synaptic source, then it will not automatically update?
>
> If I recall incorrectly about that, then as with my library question 
> above, if I manually install 0.5.xand the available GetDeb version 
> eventually catches up and passes that, will it transition smoothly?
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/lubuntu-users/attachments/20130207/dce902d2/attachment-0001.html>