- Zimbra Collaboration 9.0.0 now available. Read the release notes.
- Zimbra Collaboration 8.8.15 LTS now available. Read the release notes.
- Are you a Zimbra Developer? You can find some interesting stuff in our Official GitHub, Blog and the Community Github.
- Zimbra is Open Source! Read the FAQ. You can also contribute and build binary from source!
- Advanced member
- Posts: 52
- Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2014 9:10 am
- Location: Maine
- ZCS/ZD Version: Zimbra 8.8.15
(yes, in fact, I already had some problems that way, but just on some freedesktop stuff, eg. polkit, etc, which is buggy and broken-by-design anyways - completely irrelevant for server stuff)
By the way: dist-upgrade is only needed, if some packages are held back. And that usually only happens when the upgrade introduces some new dependencies, which aren't installed yet (IOW: the selected-packages-set changes).
Dont mix it up w/ `do-release-upgrade`, which actually moves to a new distro release (thus upgrading to really new (major) versions).
No, what you're talking about is `do-release-upgrade`. (at least for Ubuntu)
The dist-upgrade is only needed if the package set changes, eg. because an upgrade would pull in new dependencies.
You have right, sorry I've messed up the concepts - https://help.ubuntu.com/lts/serverguide/installing-upgrading.html
And from the man of the apt-get:
in addition to performing the function of upgrade,
also intelligently handles changing dependencies with new versions
of packages; apt-get has a "smart" conflict resolution system, and
it will attempt to upgrade the most important packages at the
expense of less important ones if necessary. So, dist-upgrade
command may remove some packages. The /etc/apt/sources.list file
contains a list of locations from which to retrieve desired package
files. See also apt_preferences(5) for a mechanism for overriding
the general settings for individual packages
Best regards and thank you for the note!
The reason behind the differenciation between plain upgrade and release-upgrade is that operators might not expect a changing package set (eg. possibly some packages disappearing, or new ones appearing that might cause some trouble). Therefore apt wants to be told explicitly to do such changes.
The rationale behind this is that users/operators might actively use certain packages which had been pulled in implicitly via dependencies and could be removed by deps changing on some upgrade. That could lead to some unexpected behaviour (from users/operators PoV - even though logically the system remains consistent), so apt provides an additional line of safety here.
In other words: plain `apt-get upgrade` generally is safe enough to be run automatically (see: unattended-upgrades).
dist-upgrade should be done w/ some bit of caution (on production systems), just to be sure.
OTOH, an full release upgrade, is a different topic, which - for important production systems - should be well-tested.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests