From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Larsen To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: Comments regarding the upgrade process Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 23:45:19 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1450823795.2928.14.camel@ipfire.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7712490782104034151==" List-Id: --===============7712490782104034151== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 23:36:35 +0100, Michael Tremer wrote: > Hi, > > I am afraid that I must disappoint you on some of these points. pakfire > in IPFire 2 is legacy code and I do not have the time to add new > features. It is just maintained as it is and bugs are fixed. > > We have a rewrite of this in IPFire 3 already. So, there will be more verbose output? >> PAKFIRE UPGR: We are going to install all packages listed above. >> PAKFIRE INFO: Is this okay? [y/N] >> >> --> Shouldn't the default be Yes? > > Why? Cause you would normally want to install the new packages? And maybe IPFire relies on the new versions? (I don't know how this is supposed to work) Lars --===============7712490782104034151==--