upgrade vs dist-upgrade

Thilo Six T.Six at gmx.de
Mon Apr 10 20:22:03 UTC 2006

Hash: RIPEMD160

Derek Broughton schrieb am 10.04.2006 20:48:

>>As long as you do *NOT* change the sources.list, it is just the same.
>>I do dist-upgrade everyday to perform security updates.
> Sorry, but that's completely wrong.  If you're using stable sources, it's
> probably _unlikely_ that a dist-upgrade would differ from an upgrade, but
> if (like me) you're using dapper (or sid for debianites) they'll frequently
> have different effects.

Isn´t that just what i had said?
(You may want to re read the rest of this stripped post)

I my case and probably the largest number of users are running stable.
Which means nothing deeply changes.

In that case dist-upgrade only performs security updates (where should
others updateable packages come from?)

And then when you choose to upgrade to a new release the following is as
> But when you are changing the sources.list (let it point to a new
> release) then dist-upgarde will not only upgrade packages with a higher
> Version number (as upgrade does) instead it also upgrades all it´s
> dependencies.

So please show me where i am mislead?

bye Thilo
- --
i am on Ubuntu 2.6 KDE
- - some friend of mine

gpg key: Ox4A411E09

Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list