Edgy in the news

<posted and mailed>

Constantine Evans spake thusly on 10/29/2006 04:00 PM:
> m c wrote:
>> * Using apt-get dist-upgrade rather than
upgrade-manager
>>    - Could this be  reduced by emphaising on the
release notes, on
>> ubuntu.com and in the support channels, the correct
way to upgrade?
>>    - Could apt be patched to give clearer warnings
that dist upgrading
>> could break your system, and recommend that the
user run upgrade
>> manager instead. In fact, just run update-manager
when the user tries
>> this, whilst siulanousy taking their pony away from
them
> 
> I don't use update-manager because I prefer doing such
things with a 
> CLI. Running update-manager instead of dist-upgrade
when the user wants 
> to run dist-upgrade would be completely inappropriate.
How do you even 
> know that the user is in X? How do you know that they
have X installed?

I've never done an upgrade. I always do fresh installs. 
With that said,
it's absolutely aabsurd for users to be officially
discouraged from
"apt-get dist-upgrade".  Ubuntu *is* Debian based
and that's pretty
standard stuff.  It's not unorthodox by any means.  Frankly
I'm more
paranoid about using the updater for upgrades.


> I'd rather not have Ubuntu *force* any user to do
anything, especially 
> something that requires X.

Well I don't see how they could *force* anybody to do
anything.  They
just won't help you out if you do things they way they
weren't meant (by
the Ubuntu devs) to be done.

With that said, I'm infamous for arguing with devs. 


> Warnings about Automatix would probably offend quite a
few people.

I've heard so much about that program being garbage (unlike
EasyUbuntu)
that I've never even looked at it.  It's not from an Ubuntu
developer.
It's not in the Ubuntu archive. Why shouldn't Ubuntu
discourage people
from using it?


>> Perhaps there needs to be a greater emphasis on
widespread and
>> systematic testing of upgrades rather than the
large number of
>> variants of CD installs in the release crunch,
including from
>> non-standard, user abused systems
> 
> I'm not sure why non-standard systems should be
considered "abused". 
> Many users have good reasons for having non-standard
systems. I 
> installed Ubuntu using debootstrap, and I'd rather not
be admonished for 
> doing so.

And if your system works and you've not had problems, then
fine. But
Ubuntu doesn't support that method of install.  If you had
problems and
complained that would be another story.  Why should they
help you out
when you didn't install the way they intended for you to? 
It's not like
you're paying for support.



-- 
	Scott
www.angrykeyboarder.com
© 2006 angrykeyboarder™ & Elmer Fudd. All Wights
Wesewved


-- 
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devellists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel