Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > "Keith G. Murphy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > No, I honestly don't think it's that at all. The problem is, once you > > let the package maintainers update stable on the fly with bug fixes, how > > do you ensure they don't break something major (which may not even be > > the package itself in isolation, but interaction with others)? > > OTOH, it would seem to be feasible to update and test packages which > are leafs on the dependency tree. How would they affect packages > which don't depend on them? > > For example, it would seem reasonable to upgrade Gnus, nethack or sl, > which don't seem to have any other packages depending on them.[1] It > might be feasible to upgrade Emacs, since you would have a limited > number of packages to check. It would be very difficult to upgrade > libc. > > This would seem to allow the updating of many desktop-type apps (as > long as they worked with the existing version of the libraries they > depend on). > > Footnotes: > [1] Is there a way to check that, I wonder?
deborphan would probably do that. Or a modification of it. I don't think you are able to install EVERYTHING in the distribution, so you'll have to take that into account with the current version of deborphan, I think... my 2 yen. Marshal > > -- > Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - In a variety of flavors! > I'm a Hollywood writer; so I put on a sports jacket and take off my brain. > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
