On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:04:27 +1100, Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Jan 15, 2005 at 05:48:34PM -0500, Roy Murphy wrote: > > No distribution really does dependencies well. Let's > > say some third party developer targets FC3 and sets > > his dependencies to the version numbers in FC3. Some > > user somewhere running FC2 wants to install it and > > there are major dependency version clashes. Does that > > mean the package *won't* work on FC2? Maybe, maybe > > not. The package may not actually use features new to > > the latest version. > > That's only an issue when an FC2 -> FC3 upgrade is a > major undertaking. It shouldn't be and I don't > understand why you would tolerate that.
I was just using FC2/FC3 as an example, but in my 10 years history of Linux, I have had systems which grew from a distribution install to something where I had complied software and modified the kernel(s) for one reason or another to the point where it would have been a major undertaking to upgrade a distribution and then fix the breakage that resulted. I also have some Linux boxes which only boot from HD and for which upgrading means pulling the HD and pluggin it into another computer. > All Debian upgrades consist of 'apt-get' to newer > versions of individual packages; you are never required > to reinstall, and a reinstall is never easier. So if you > use third party packages which require newer base > packages, apt-get will fetch those for you. No big deal. > > For those who aren't aware, apt-get is a Debian program > originally. I have political differences with the people behind Debian which have kept me from trying the distribution. They are too ideological for me.
_______________________________________________ mythtv-users mailing list [email protected] http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
