On 02/18/2010 09:25 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Thu, 2010-02-18 at 10:32 +0100, Thomas Janssen wrote:
> 2010/2/18 Kevin Kofler<kevin.kofler(a)chello.at>:
>> Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>>> 1) using "... update kde*" will also pull in any dependencies that
>>> needs from updates-testing, so you don't need anything else.
>> Not necessarily, sometimes it misses some stuff.
>>> 2) not restricting yourself to kde* (and its dependencies) increases the
>>> risk of a flaky system because you're updating a bunch of stuff you
>>> don't care about. It can then be hard to back out to *not* using
>>> updates-testing for every future update.
>> But this is true.
> Quite interesting. What's true there? The risk of a flaky system?
> Yeah, that can happen. But that happens as well with updates from
> updates repo.
Please re-read my original reply. I said it *increases* the risk of a
flaky system. Kevin appears to agree.
> And you think it's true that you cant back out and stop using
> updates-testing because you used it once?
Ditto. I didn't say that either.
But you did say "It can then be hard to back out to *not* using
updates-testing for every future update."
I don't understand the logic there. If you use updates-testing to get
the kde packages from updates-testing and then stop using
updates-testing, eventually the updates you got from updates-testing
make it to updates. From that point on you are back to the same state
you would have been by just using updates.
kde mailing list
New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org