How to update Vector Light

[edward]

I asked about the kernel, because one of the updates retrieved last night, had what looked like a kernel version number as part of the actual filename.  The new updated package had 2.6.22.19 (or 2-6-22-19) as part of the filename - the old had another version number, so I thought that perhaps there was an updated kernel available.  I think it may have been the alsa package.

uname is showing kernel 2.6.22.19.

[lagagnon]

Just to back up a bit can I ask why you want to update? Is there some advantage for you to update? The reason I ask is that, IMHO,  updating should only be done when:
1) you absolutely must have specific new functionality in a specific software package for which you know about such new functionality
2) there is a major security hole in one or more packages.

Blindly updating is a waste of time and frought with potential breakages. This is so on almost any operating system. My philosophy over 6 years of using Linux is to upgrade (not update) when a new final version of the OS is released - keeping my /home partition intact so I loose no data in the process. This has served me well. I have never had a breakage or a major system crash. If you read any computer forum for any OS the posts are littered with problems associated with updating (mostly unecessary I might add). If it ain't broke don't fix it!

 

[caitlyn]

I completely disagree with lagagnon.  Oh, I agree with "if it ain't broke don't fix it", but most of what's in patches is, in fact, fixing broken things.  A number of the patches fix security vulnerabilities that weren't know when VL was released but came to light later.  This includes everything from xine-lib, which was vulnerable to both DoS attacks and buffer overflow attacks, to browsers which were vulnerable, to a version of samba with an easily exploited vulnerability.  Almost everything else represents bug fixes.  We have very few feature release upgrades.  In fact, you can count them on the fingers of one hand and have fingers left over.

I've used Linux personally for 13 years and professionally for 10.  I encourage a system-wide upgrade because it is a dirt simple way for any and every user to make sure their system remains secure.  It has been perfectly safe to do so in Vector Linux since version 5.8 was released in late 2006.

FWIW, if a distro doesn't have a good and easy way to remain up to date I won't use it.

[GrannyGeek]

I agree strongly with Caitlyn that Mark All Upgrades should be available in Gslapt. I have also expressed this on this forum more than once.

I am not one to update my system or a package "just because it's there." I want to do security updates but I'm fairly conservative about upgrading programs. What I want is an easy way to at least *SEE* what updates are available. Without Mark All Upgrades working, it's very difficult and time consuming to know what could be updated. If it's from the Patches repo, I install it. From anything else, I think about it and may decide to pass. I'm an adult. I don't need a Nanny to watch over me and protect me from my own mistakes. Learning what and why to update is part of learning how to be a savvy computer user regardless of operating system.
--GrannyGeek

[edward]

I update because it's smart to.  Every update that I've (or the distro updater) have installed (prior to using Vector), has fixed either bugs or security issues.

[nightflier]

I have seen system-wide upgrades hose several installs. This was before Vector. I remember Knoppix, Libranet and Ubuntu managing to cripple themselves. With VL I have never done system upgrades, but do try to keep browsers, plugins and email clients updated.

[caitlyn]

nightflier:  I don't doubt your experience.  What you are describing is poor repository management or packaging.  I've never used Libranet or Knoppix as anything but a live distro.  I have maintained Red Hat Linux since v. 3.0 or so circa 1995.  It never failed there (or on Fedora), never with Mandriva for me, never with Ubuntu (far less experience), and never with Vector Linux since 5.8.  Prior to that we know it didn't work.

[nightflier]

I plan to upgrade from 5.8 soon. Before wiping out the old install, I will first try a system upgrade through gslapt. Might be an interesting experiment 

[wcs]

I actually have 5.9 Standard upgraded with everything even in the testing repository. Works fine, no problems at all.
I guess I shouldn't be doing it, but hey, it works. In the case of any breakage, I can always fix it or install VL again... it really doesn't take that long, and my data is safely backed up.

EDIT: Except for upgrading glib2. Didn't want to mess with that one.

I started slowly, only with those packages I wanted and only in extra...
Over time, there was not that much left to upgrade in testing, so I though what the heck.
Plus, I get to contribute to the testing 

(I lie, there is one issue -- a bunch of errors when running vxconf and installing the nvidia driver --, that seems to be caused by upgrading the X packages. But those are actually in extra, not testing, isn't it?)

[never_stop_learning]

My preference is to enable system-wide upgrades in gslapt. It is not a big deal to me, however, to have to upgrade via the command line.....