Ubuntu server holding back on me

[Peter Silva]

I think an additional source of confusion is that upgrading debian, a
normal way to upgrade to a later 'stable' (equiv. to LTS) is to change
repos in /etc/apt, and do 'apt-get dist-upgrade'... while this
operation was always fairly functional and reliable to upgrade Debian
servers, I had little, if any success using it in Ubuntu
(do_release_upgrade works bettter.) It is unexpected and confusing
that Debian and Ubuntu are different in that way, since they are so
close otherwise.


On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 5:54 AM, Oliver Grawert <ogra at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> hi,
> Am Freitag, den 22.09.2017, 11:21 +0200 schrieb Liam Proven:
>> On 22 September 2017 at 10:43, Oliver Grawert <ogra at ubuntu.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > simply stop using apt-get, "apt upgrade" is what you want in newer
>> > ubuntus ...
>> That should be:
>>
>> apt full-upgrade
>>
>
> nope, full-upgrade means "additionally allow removal of packages (even
> if they are essential)" while the newly merged "upgrade" command simply
> makes sure there are no held back packages during the upgrade process
> itself.
> you can use full-upgrade if you dont want to have to call "apt
> autoremove" to clean up old kernels, the new "upgrade" should actually
> be enough for normal daily use though ...
>
> here is the difference between the relevant manpage entries:
>
> old (apt-get):
> "New versions of currently installed packages that cannot be upgraded
> without changing the install status of another package will be left at
> their current version."
> (this is typically what causes the "held packages" message)
>
> new (apt):
> "New packages will be installed if required to satisfy dependencies,
> but existing packages will never be removed."
>
>
> ciao
>         oli
> --
> ubuntu-users mailing list
> ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
>