difference between "do-release-upgrade" and "apt-get dist-upgrade"
christopher.chan at bradbury.edu.hk
Wed Oct 6 03:32:20 UTC 2010
On Wednesday, October 06, 2010 10:47 AM, Sandy Harris wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Christopher Chan
> <christopher.chan at bradbury.edu.hk> wrote:
>> Alan is talking about circular dependencies and other such like rubbish.
>> There have been those who hosed their installation because they used
>> apt-get dist-upgrade to upgrade. And there have been those who have not
>> been toasted by upgrading with apt-get dist-upgrade. It all pretty much
>> depends on what you have or have not installed.
> I've just used Synaptic for all upgrades from 7.something to 10.04.
> No visible problems so far. Box is a pretty standard machine with
> on-board Intel graphics chip and ethernet.
> Should I be doing something else? Should I take some steps to
> clean up any possible oddities before the next upgrade?
Nope. synaptic does the right thing.
For those who want to do it via the commandline, they should be using
do-release-upgrade. You can ignore all the howling about apt-get whatever.
More information about the ubuntu-users