On Mi, 08 mai 19, 19:52:44, Justin B Rye wrote: > Andrei POPESCU wrote: > > LGTM FWIW, I'll let Justin do his magic :) > > LGTM too. Hang on, I'll set my nitpicker to Turbo mode. > > # You should also make sure the system is <quote>clean</quote> before > > This is "clean" in a rather nerdy sense (cf. the way an "unclean" > filesystem may require ritual purification via fsck); and APT also has > a technical meaning of its own for "apt clean". What we're really > trying to say here is something more like "stable"... but we can't use > that word either. s|<quote>clean</quote>|consistent| ? > # proceeding with the upgrade. If you are a user of another package manager > # like <systemitem role="package">aptitude</systemitem> or <systemitem > # role="package">synaptic</systemitem>, review any pending actions. If a > # package is scheduled for removal or update in the package manager, it might > > Is it possible for a scheduled *update* (or I think it means > "upgrade") to cause trouble? After all, as soon as I call for a > dist-upgrade they're *all* going to be scheduled for an upgrade. > There can be problems if the pending upgrade pulls in extra packages, > but then the real issue is that a package is scheduled for > installation. In fact maybe it should be: > > If a package is scheduled in the package manager for installation or removal, Agreed. > Or am I missing possibilities? > > # negatively impact the upgrade procedure. Note that correcting this is only > # possible if your APT source-list files still point to > # <emphasis>&oldreleasename;</emphasis> and not to > # <emphasis>stable</emphasis> or <emphasis>&releasename;</emphasis>; see > # <xref linkend="old-sources"/>. > > ("Negatively impact" makes me think of "rapid unscheduled > disassembly".) s/it might negatively impact/it might interfere in unexpected ways with/ ? Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature