Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

about installing lxde (which xserver)

3 views
Skip to first unread message

Harry Putnam

unread,
Jun 9, 2012, 7:00:02 PM6/9/12
to
I've recently done a tremendous amount of removing and purging. I
wanted rid of kde and finally to install lxde. And threw into the
bargain moving from testing to stable.

There is plenty of howto available for installing lxde, but I'm a bit
puzzled by the output of `aptitude -s install lxde'

It shows quite a herd of stuff to be installed:

,----
| The following NEW packages will be installed:
| arj{a} fuse-utils{ab} gksu{a} gpicview{a} gvfs{a} gvfs-backends{a}
| gvfs-fuse{a} hal{a} hal-info{a} leafpad{a} libdrm-nouveau1{a}
| libfm-gtk0{a} libfm0{a}
| libgksu2-0{a} libhal-storage1{a} libimobiledevice1{a}
| libmenu-cache1{a} libnotify1{a} librpm1{ab} librpmbuild1{a}
| librpmio1{a} libxcb-atom1{a}
| libxcb-aux0{a} libxmmsclient-glib1{a} libxmmsclient6{a}
| lxappearance{a} lxde lxde-common{a} lxde-core{a} lxde-icon-theme{a}
| lxinput{a} lxmenu-data{a}
| lxmusic{a} lxpanel{a} lxrandr{a} lxsession{a} lxsession-edit{a}
| lxshortcut{a} lxterminal{a} menu-xdg{a} openbox{a} openbox-themes{a}
| pcmanfm{a} rpm{ab}
| x11-utils{a} x11-xserver-utils{a} xarchiver{a} xauth{a} xdg-utils{a}
| xfonts-base{a} xfonts-encodings{a} xfonts-utils{a} xli{a}
| xmms2-core{a}
| xmms2-plugin-alsa{a} xmms2-plugin-id3v2{a} xmms2-plugin-mad{a}
| xmms2-plugin-vorbis{a} xscreensaver{a} xscreensaver-data{a}
| xserver-common{a}
| xserver-xorg{a} xserver-xorg-core{a} xserver-xorg-input-all{a}
| xserver-xorg-input-evdev{a} xserver-xorg-input-synaptics{a}
| xserver-xorg-input-wacom{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-all{a} xserver-xorg-video-apm{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-ark{a} xserver-xorg-video-ati{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-chips{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-cirrus{a} xserver-xorg-video-fbdev{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-geode{a} xserver-xorg-video-i128{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-i740{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-intel{a} xserver-xorg-video-mach64{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-mga{a} xserver-xorg-video-neomagic{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-nouveau{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-nv{a} xserver-xorg-video-openchrome{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-r128{a} xserver-xorg-video-radeon{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-rendition{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-s3{a} xserver-xorg-video-s3virge{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-savage{a} xserver-xorg-video-siliconmotion{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-sis{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-sisusb{a} xserver-xorg-video-tdfx{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-trident{a} xserver-xorg-video-tseng{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-vesa{a}
| xserver-xorg-video-vmware{a} xserver-xorg-video-voodoo{a}
`----

Note the nest of xservers involved.

I seem to recall there being some way to put a bit of constraint on
what xserver gets installed but my pea brain has lost track of it.

To an experienced debian user:
Does this list look a little ridiculous?

How might I give the installer a clue about which xserver to install?


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87r4tof...@newsguy.com

Jochen Spieker

unread,
Jun 9, 2012, 10:00:02 PM6/9/12
to
Harry Putnam:
>
> I've recently done a tremendous amount of removing and purging. I
> wanted rid of kde and finally to install lxde. And threw into the
> bargain moving from testing to stable.

Downgrading is unsupported and you should generally expect a lot of
trouble doing so.

> There is plenty of howto available for installing lxde, but I'm a bit
> puzzled by the output of `aptitude -s install lxde'
>
> It shows quite a herd of stuff to be installed:
…
>| xserver-xorg-video-all{a} xserver-xorg-video-apm{a}
…
> Note the nest of xservers involved.

There's just one X server, X.org. The list just contains a lot of
drivers for different video and input hardware. That's because lxde
depends on x-display-manager (or gdm3) and that depends on xserver-xorg
and that in turn depends on xserver-xorg-video-all and
xserver-xorg-input-all which pull in all those dependencies.

You don't really need to care about these packages. They take very
little disk space. If you want, you can remove the *-all packages, but
you will have to fiddle with apt(itude) to satisfy dependencies and, of
course, to keep the drivers installed which you actually use. Using
aptitude's interactive TUI mode is probably the easiest way.

BTW, 'aptitude why $packagename' tells you why it wants to have a
certain package installed.

> To an experienced debian user:
> Does this list look a little ridiculous?

Only superficially. An ad-hoc one-liner to calculate the size of all
direct dependencies of xserver-xorg-video-all:

$ for p in $( apt-cache show xserver-xorg-video-all | grep ^Depends | \
cut -d: -f2 | sed -e 's#,##g'); do apt-cache show $p | grep \
^Installed-Size | cut -d: -f2; done | awk ' BEGIN { s=0 } { s+=$1 } END
{ print s }'
7320

That's kiloBytes. The package xserver-xorg-input-all comes out at 517kB.

J.
--
If I could travel in time I would show my minidisc to the Romans and
become Caesar until the batteries ran out.
[Agree] [Disagree]
<http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>
signature.asc

ACro

unread,
Jun 9, 2012, 10:00:02 PM6/9/12
to
> Does this list look a little ridiculous?

It doesn't :-) AFAIK this is the default behaviour when installing xserver-xorg,
although not all packages may really be needed.

While their names are all starting with xserver-xorg-, they are not different
servers: many are drivers. xserver-xorg-video-* are graphics drivers and
xserver-xorg-video-all depends from them, whereas xserver-xorg-input-* are,
indeed, input device drivers.

The real server is xserver-xorg-core, while xserver-xorg is a metapackage
including other components in the installation, like drivers.

You don't really need xserver-xorg-video-all, you can safely exclude it, along
with all non needed drivers: after you have identified your graphics chipset
you can install only the driver required by it.

But this is fine tuning, you can safely go ahead with the default xserver
installation.

Best regards,
Andrew


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1339293200.4...@mail.bluebottle.com

Chris Bannister

unread,
Jun 9, 2012, 10:30:01 PM6/9/12
to
On Sat, Jun 09, 2012 at 06:55:48PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
> I've recently done a tremendous amount of removing and purging. I
> wanted rid of kde and finally to install lxde. And threw into the
> bargain moving from testing to stable.

Downgrades are not supported. You are in for an uphill battle.

--
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the
oppressing." --- Malcolm X


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120610022458.GK14772@tal

Harry Putnam

unread,
Jun 10, 2012, 1:00:02 AM6/10/12
to
Chris Bannister <cbann...@slingshot.co.nz> writes:

> On Sat, Jun 09, 2012 at 06:55:48PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
>> I've recently done a tremendous amount of removing and purging. I
>> wanted rid of kde and finally to install lxde. And threw into the
>> bargain moving from testing to stable.
>
> Downgrades are not supported. You are in for an uphill battle.

Strangely enough things seem to have settled down.

I kept installing parts of xorg and lxde and eventually it all seemed
to work. Or at least at a casual glance.

I am getting a message when the desktop loads (following startx) that
says I've had a kernel failure... However I don't see anything obvious
that does not seem to be working.

I'm not seeing anything regarding kernel in /var/log/messages or
/var/log/kern.log... that seems to be about a failure.

Possibly I'm just blind.

I'm liking what I've seen of lxde so far too.

So basically I'm a happy camper... I must say though that none of it
happened thru my exceptional skill... it was all blind luck and
happenstance.

However, I think that happenstance might mean that even a fairly
incompetent klutz might be able to blunder thru a huge bout of ripping
out kde and most of X then moving from testing to stable, and finally
installing lxde and enough of xorg stuff to make it work, without all
that much trouble.

I might add that there were quite a few instances where aptitude
claimed to be installing stuff, but in fact did not. I would just
pick out some other package that was involved and try again.
Eventually it seemed to work.

I guess it points up the truth of the legendary solidity of debian.

Of course I may be speaking a bit too soon.....


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87zk8by...@newsguy.com

Harry Putnam

unread,
Jun 10, 2012, 1:00:02 AM6/10/12
to
ACro <ac...@bluebottle.com> writes:

>> Does this list look a little ridiculous?
>
> It doesn't :-) AFAIK this is the default behaviour when installing
> xserver-xorg,
> although not all packages may really be needed.

[...]

Thanks for the details regarding the xserver stuff.

Jochen Spieker <m...@well-adjusted.de> writes:

[...]

>> Note the nest of xservers involved.
>
> There's just one X server, X.org. The list just contains a lot of
> drivers for different video and input hardware. That's because lxde
> depends on x-display-manager (or gdm3) and that depends on xserver-xorg
> and that in turn depends on xserver-xorg-video-all and
> xserver-xorg-input-all which pull in all those dependencies.

[...]

Thanks to you too for the details about the xservers and drivers
phenomena.

> BTW, 'aptitude why $packagename' tells you why it wants to have a
> certain package installed.

Nice tip ... thanks

Nice unix command line too... It took me a bit to figure out why it
would not copy paste to the cmdline. Finally I realized that the mail
formatting had broke a line you probably did not expect and so there
was no newline escape following `END' in your message.

With that in place.... it plinks out the size in short order.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87vcizy...@newsguy.com

Christofer C. Bell

unread,
Jun 10, 2012, 2:40:02 AM6/10/12
to
On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Harry Putnam <rea...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
> However, I think that happenstance might mean that even a fairly
> incompetent klutz might be able to blunder thru a huge bout of ripping
> out kde and most of X then moving from testing to stable, and finally
> installing lxde and enough of xorg stuff to make it work, without all
> that much trouble.

Harry, this move from testing to stable has me perplexed. How did you
accomplish that? Can you please post your /etc/apt/sources.list, the
content of /etc/debian_version, the output of "uname -a" and the
versions of the following packages?

* coreutils (stable is at 8.5-1)
* base-files (stable is at 6.0squeeze5)
* bash (stable is at 4.1-3)
* dpkg (stable is at 1.15.8.12)
* apt (stable is at 0.8.10.3+squeeze1)

You can check these with:

harry@debian:~$ dpkg -l $package_name

A downgrade of the operating system to a prior release (in this case,
from testing to stable, or from wheezy to squeeze) is really not
supported by the package management system. The above files,
commands, and package versions look at some key operating system
version information and core package versions and will give a good
indication as to whether or not you're actually back on stable. I
just can't shake the feeling you're now running some sort of
frankenstein combination of testing and stable.

--
Chris


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAOEVnYuON+BUQQJwf5q5XUFyOG5j+=thAQSPYQKh...@mail.gmail.com

Jochen Spieker

unread,
Jun 10, 2012, 5:20:02 AM6/10/12
to
Harry Putnam:
>
> Nice unix command line too... It took me a bit to figure out why it
> would not copy paste to the cmdline. Finally I realized that the mail
> formatting had broke a line you probably did not expect and so there
> was no newline escape following `END' in your message.

Yeah, sorry. I actually wrote everything in one line. When pasting it
into the mail, my editor inserted the line breaks and I just added a few
backslashes where I thought appropriate.

The actual problem I have when copy-pasting it back is that I didn't
quote the regular expression "^Installed-Size". Since it is in the
beginning of a line, bash interpreted it as a "quick substitution". JFTR
a copy-pasteable version:

for p in $( apt-cache show xserver-xorg-video-all | grep ^Depends | \
cut -d: -f2 | sed -e 's#,##g'); do apt-cache show $p | grep \
"^Installed-Size" | cut -d: -f2; done | awk ' BEGIN { s=0 } { s+=$1 }
END { print s }'

The line before END doesn't needs it's newline escaped because of the
open single-quoted string.

J.
--
Thy lyrics in pop songs seem to describe my life uncannily accurately.
[Agree] [Disagree]
<http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>
signature.asc

Andrei POPESCU

unread,
Jun 10, 2012, 1:10:02 PM6/10/12
to
On Du, 10 iun 12, 01:38:17, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
> I just can't shake the feeling you're now running some sort of
> frankenstein combination of testing and stable.

apt-show-versions would tell.

Kind regards,
Andrei
--
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic
signature.asc

Harry Putnam

unread,
Jun 10, 2012, 1:20:02 PM6/10/12
to
"Christofer C. Bell" <christof...@gmail.com> writes:

> On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Harry Putnam <rea...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>>
>> However, I think that happenstance might mean that even a fairly
>> incompetent klutz might be able to blunder thru a huge bout of ripping
>> out kde and most of X then moving from testing to stable, and finally
>> installing lxde and enough of xorg stuff to make it work, without all
>> that much trouble.
>
> Harry, this move from testing to stable has me perplexed. How did you
> accomplish that? Can you please post your /etc/apt/sources.list, the
> content of /etc/debian_version, the output of "uname -a" and the
> versions of the following packages?

Egad, don't start picking this apart... it's working :)

It was a bit of a slug fest... and I made many moves without recording
what I'd done... but I can post the requested stuff.

,----
| /etc/apt/sources.list
| deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ squeeze main contrib non-free
| # deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ wheezy main
| deb http://security.debian.org/ squeeze/updates main contrib non-free
| # deb-src http://security.debian.org/ wheezy/updates main
| deb http://mirrors.kernel.org/debian squeeze-updates main contrib
`----

,----
| cat /etc/debian_version
| wheezy/sid (whOOOps)
`----

,----
| uname -a
| Linux reader 3.0.0-1-686-pae #1 SMP Sat
| Aug 27 16:41:03 UTC 2011 i686 GNU/Linux
`----

> * coreutils (stable is at 8.5-1)
> * base-files (stable is at 6.0squeeze5)
> * bash (stable is at 4.1-3)
> * dpkg (stable is at 1.15.8.12)
> * apt (stable is at 0.8.10.3+squeeze1)

,----
| dpkg -l coreutils base-files bash dpkg apt
| Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| | Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/ ...
| |/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
| ||/ Name Version Description
| +++-=================-=======================================
| ii apt 0.8.15.9 Advd front-end for dpkg
| ii base-files 6.5 Deb base system misc ...
| ii bash 4.2-1 GNU Bourne Again SHell
| ii coreutils 8.13-3 GNU core utilities
| ii dpkg 1.16.1.2 Deb package management ...
`----

,----
| dpkg-query -W|awk '{printf "%-40s %s\n", $1, $2}'|egrep \
| '^(coreutils |base-files |bash |dpkg |apt )'
| apt 0.8.15.9
| base-files 6.5
| bash 4.2-1
| coreutils 8.13-3
| dpkg 1.16.1.2
`----

Yikes, looks like I lied thru my teeth.

But I can tell you that all those notices about updates when I was
running testing do not come anymore...

> You can check these with:
>
> harry@debian:~$ dpkg -l $package_name
>
> A downgrade of the operating system to a prior release (in this case,
> from testing to stable, or from wheezy to squeeze) is really not
> supported by the package management system. The above files,
> commands, and package versions look at some key operating system
> version information and core package versions and will give a good
> indication as to whether or not you're actually back on stable. I
> just can't shake the feeling you're now running some sort of
> frankenstein combination of testing and stable.

Err yup, looks like Marty Feldman, although now deceased, could make a
comeback otherwise.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/874nqjn...@newsguy.com

Christofer C. Bell

unread,
Jun 10, 2012, 8:50:02 PM6/10/12
to
Well, you seem to be somewhat successfully running testing, but with
your sources.list set as it is, you'll never actually get any updated
packages. Everything will be newer in testing, and you're pointing
only at squeeze (where everything will be either the same or lower
version).

I would suggest uncommenting the wheezy bits, commenting out the
squeeze buts (perhaps adding contrib and non-free at your option) and
running another apt-get update, apt-get upgrade and seeing what it
wants to do. It's likely to want to install a number of packages to
bring your "then current" wheezy install to the "now current" versions
of packages. You don't have to apply the update, just see what it
wants to do.

--
Chris


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAOEVnYvgHePkiQ7ntqTc8BcL...@mail.gmail.com

Chris Bannister

unread,
Jun 11, 2012, 2:00:02 AM6/11/12
to
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 01:17:27PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
> Err yup, looks like Marty Feldman, although now deceased, could make a
> comeback otherwise.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlPAVm8Gl6M

--
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the
oppressing." --- Malcolm X


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120611055028.GB25233@tal

Andrei POPESCU

unread,
Jun 11, 2012, 2:40:02 AM6/11/12
to
On Du, 10 iun 12, 13:17:27, Harry Putnam wrote:
>
> ,----
> | /etc/apt/sources.list
> | deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ squeeze main contrib non-free
> | # deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ wheezy main
> | deb http://security.debian.org/ squeeze/updates main contrib non-free
> | # deb-src http://security.debian.org/ wheezy/updates main
> | deb http://mirrors.kernel.org/debian squeeze-updates main contrib
> `----
...
> But I can tell you that all those notices about updates when I was
> running testing do not come anymore...

Not surprising, given that you don't have wheezy sources anymore. You
may want to check the output of

apt-show-versions | grep -v squeeze

It will show you the packages still to be downgraded to get you to 100%
squeeze. Whether you should actually do that depends on the amount and
importance of packages.
signature.asc

Harry Putnam

unread,
Jun 11, 2012, 4:50:02 PM6/11/12
to
Chris Bannister <cbann...@slingshot.co.nz> writes:

> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 01:17:27PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
>> Err yup, looks like Marty Feldman, although now deceased, could make a
>> comeback otherwise.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlPAVm8Gl6M

Hilarious. Marty's wall eyes are such an amazing site he doesn't have
to do much else.

I was speaking of his role in Frankenstein of course... but thanks for
the URL... its a good one.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8762axm...@newsguy.com

Harry Putnam

unread,
Jun 11, 2012, 5:00:03 PM6/11/12
to
"Christofer C. Bell" <christof...@gmail.com> writes:

> I would suggest uncommenting the wheezy bits, commenting out the
> squeeze buts (perhaps adding contrib and non-free at your option) and
> running another apt-get update, apt-get upgrade and seeing what it
> wants to do. It's likely to want to install a number of packages to
> bring your "then current" wheezy install to the "now current" versions
> of packages. You don't have to apply the update, just see what it
> wants to do.

Just for the record, following the above advice, here is the output:
> I would suggest uncommenting the wheezy bits, commenting out the
> squeeze buts (perhaps adding contrib and non-free at your option) and
> running another apt-get update, apt-get upgrade and seeing what it
> wants to do. It's likely to want to install a number of packages to
> bring your "then current" wheezy install to the "now current" versions
> of packages. You don't have to apply the update, just see what it
> wants to do.

aptitude full-upgrade
,----
| No packages will be installed, upgraded, or removed.
| 0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
| Need to get 0 B of archives. After unpacking 0 B will be used.
`----

At least I seem to have fumbled my way thru to a system that is kde
free, and running lxde, which was one of my goals.

Maybe I can still go to the corner bar and brag?


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87wr3dl...@newsguy.com

Harry Putnam

unread,
Jun 11, 2012, 5:00:03 PM6/11/12
to
And here I was all patting myself on the back having accomplished some
unsupported hackery all on my own....

But since I've gotten this far and still have a living breathing OS,
what must I do to really really go to squeeze.

But unless squeeze is free of the horrible and fast march of updates
one experiences on wheezy it may not be a goal after all.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/871ullm...@newsguy.com

Christofer C. Bell

unread,
Jun 11, 2012, 10:30:02 PM6/11/12
to
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Harry Putnam <rea...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
> But unless squeeze is free of the horrible and fast march of updates
> one experiences on wheezy it may not be a goal after all.

While squeeze has updates, they are generally few and far between.
This is the intent of the stable release. Since wheezy is in testing,
it is the next release under development and will update frequently.
If you want to be on squeeze, I'd suggest your best option is backing
up your data (or if /home is a separate partition this may not be
strictly necessary if you're careful) and cleanly installing squeeze.

You can get to wheezy through a simple upgrade process once it's
released as the next stable.

--
Chris


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAOEVnYu58euzhrdgwDSGt9kA...@mail.gmail.com

Andrei POPESCU

unread,
Jun 12, 2012, 4:30:02 AM6/12/12
to
On Lu, 11 iun 12, 21:22:53, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Harry Putnam <rea...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> >
> > But unless squeeze is free of the horrible and fast march of updates
> > one experiences on wheezy it may not be a goal after all.
>
> While squeeze has updates, they are generally few and far between.
> This is the intent of the stable release.

Also very important, those updates only fix specific issues (security or
serious bugs) and should not change the behaviour of stable[1].

[1] there are exceptions to this rule
signature.asc

John Hasler

unread,
Jun 12, 2012, 1:10:02 PM6/12/12
to
Harry Putnam wrote:
> But unless squeeze is free of the horrible and fast march of updates
> one experiences on wheezy it may not be a goal after all.

Why do you feel that you need to closely track Unstable? There is
usually no urgent need to upgrade a package just because the maintainer
uploaded a new version. Promptly installing security uploads and doing
an occasional dist-upgrade when debian-devel indicates that there are no
problems works fine.
--
John Hasler


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87k3zc5...@thumper.dhh.gt.org

Harry Putnam

unread,
Jun 12, 2012, 4:50:02 PM6/12/12
to
John Hasler <jha...@newsguy.com> writes:

> Harry Putnam wrote:
>> But unless squeeze is free of the horrible and fast march of updates
>> one experiences on wheezy it may not be a goal after all.
>
> Why do you feel that you need to closely track Unstable? There is
> usually no urgent need to upgrade a package just because the maintainer
> uploaded a new version. Promptly installing security uploads and doing
> an occasional dist-upgrade when debian-devel indicates that there are no
> problems works fine.

I'm not sure how you arrived at that question... I'm to get away from
not only unstable which hasn't come up in this thread far as I know
but also wheezy... looking to get to stable from a wheezy system has
been the topic so far.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-us...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8762awf...@newsguy.com
0 new messages