Using apt dist-upgrade

[Rahul Sundaram]

Ralf Corsepius wrote:

>On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 19:52 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>  
>
>>Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 19:06 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Mark Haney wrote:
>>>>        
>>>>
>
>  
>
>>>He just has released a new release, a couple of weeks ago.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>I had that impression through previous discussions related to it in 
>>Fedora devel list and the fact the issues like multilib is/was there for 
>>a long time
>>    
>>
>Yes, apt still is not able to handle RH multilibs.
>
I dont think multi libs is specific to RH. can you clarify that 
specifically?

>Well, 95% of the issues wrt. upgrading RHL/FC are packaging bugs. These
>affect all upgrading tools, such as up2date, apt, yum, smart and
>anaconda.
>  
>

well if you know of specific issues you could file them against specific 
packages or if you can suggest any specific procedures to follow that 
improve the packaging process, I am pretty sure a discussion could be 
started on Fedora devel

>So far, I have been able to successfully upgrade my systems from RH-8.0
>through FC3. All experiments to do the same with yum, so far have failed
>or had proven to perform unacceptable.
>

Well I have personally managed to do that so its possible though it 
might not work for all scenarios



>Don't get me wrong, IMO, yum is gradually improving and has evolved to
>acceptable shape as far as "keeping systems up2date" is concerned, but
>it is still at least one magnitude behind apt elsewhere.
>

It would be fair to allow a chance for the yum developers to respond to 
these issues. So a post to the fedora devel or yum lists would be 
appropriate

>I prefer a tool that refuses to remove packages in case of conflicts
>(yum/apt), others wondered why "this'n'that" packages suddenly vanished.
>
>Ralf
>
>  
>

Yes. I would agree with that. we had a user complaining about it pretty 
recently in Fedora devel

regards
Rahul