Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Harlan) writes:
> To reinstall, something like this works:
>
> dpkg --get-selections | grep -w install | awk '{print $1}' | xargs -m 10 --
> apt-get -y --reinstall install
You probably have to make a
apt-get clear
first.
Matthias
Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 02:56:19PM -0800, kristian kvilekval wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-11-17 at 16:46 -0600, Pete Harlan wrote:
>
> > With gcc-3.4 the problem went away.
> >
> > pure64 obviously works for a lot of people, but if you have trouble
> > with pure64 I'd recommend seeing if the problems go away with gcc-3.4.
>
>Is there a better upgrade path than re-install from cd? Is it
> possible to dist-upgrade?
You can dist-upgrade, then reinstall all packages to make sure you get
the gcc-3.4 versions.
To reinstall, something like this works:
dpkg --get-selections | grep -w install | awk '{print $1}' | xargs -m 10 --
apt-get -y --reinstall install
--Pete
Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
On Wed, 2004-11-17 at 14:56 -0800, kristian kvilekval wrote: > On Wed, 2004-11-17 at 16:46 -0600, Pete Harlan wrote: > > > With gcc-3.4 the problem went away. > > > > pure64 obviously works for a lot of people, but if you have trouble > > with pure64 I'd recommend seeing if the problems go away with gcc-3.4. > >Is there a better upgrade path than re-install from cd? Is it > possible to dist-upgrade? > Yeah, it is possible. I've just dist-upgraded from pure64. The upgrade was successfull i think. I had a few issues with upgrading sed, ncurses and a few other packages. For some of the packages (for some strange reason) the /var/lib/dpkg/available was corrupted and I had to manually adjust couple of things. But after a reboot everything was working like it should )). -- Andrei Mikhailovsky Arhont Ltd - Information Security Web: http://www.arhont.com http://www.wi-foo.com Tel: +44 (0)870 4431337 Fax: +44 (0)117 9690141 PGP: Key ID - 0xFF67A4F4 PGP: Server - keyserver.pgp.com
Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
On Wed, 2004-11-17 at 16:46 -0600, Pete Harlan wrote: > With gcc-3.4 the problem went away. > > pure64 obviously works for a lot of people, but if you have trouble > with pure64 I'd recommend seeing if the problems go away with gcc-3.4. Is there a better upgrade path than re-install from cd? Is it possible to dist-upgrade?
Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 06:31:14PM +0100, Jan Houstek wrote: > On Mon, 15 Nov 2004, Andreas Jochens wrote: > > > For the gcc-3.4 archive, my intention is to freeze sarge when it is > > released and to make it available as > > Well, what exactly makes gcc-3.4 such a must? I'm trying to decide which > debian port to use for production (your comming gcc-3.4 sarge or the > already existent gcc-3.3 sarge). For our purposes, running a self-compiled MySQL db server, it wasn't stable until we converted from pure64 to gcc-3.4. (Even compiling the server with gcc-3.4 under pure64 wasn't enough.) We'd run "make test" after compiling the server, and it would fail one of the 206 tests (typically a replication test, but it varied) one out of every twenty or so times through "make test". With gcc-3.4 the problem went away. pure64 obviously works for a lot of people, but if you have trouble with pure64 I'd recommend seeing if the problems go away with gcc-3.4. --Pete
Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
On 04-Nov-16 18:31, Jan Houstek wrote: > Well, what exactly makes gcc-3.4 such a must? I'm trying to decide which > debian port to use for production (your comming gcc-3.4 sarge or the > already existent gcc-3.3 sarge). gcc-3.4 is definitively not a 'must'. gcc-3.3 will work in most cases and the pure64 archive, which uses a mixture of gcc-3.3 and gcc-3.4, is much closer to the official sarge archive than the gcc-3.4 archive. The gcc-3.4 archive needs more than 250 extra patches to correct the remaining gcc-3.4 incompatibilities of the official sources. Those patches are mostly minor patches which change only a few lines of code, but they are deviations from the official sources nonetheless. However, there is a C++ ABI change from gcc-3.3 to gcc-3.4. When gcc-3.4 is used right from the beginning on amd64, the complicated ABI transition problems can be avoided. Sooner or later Debian will switch to gcc-3.4 (or gcc-4.0). Regards Andreas Jochens
Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004, Andreas Jochens wrote: > For the gcc-3.4 archive, my intention is to freeze sarge when it is > released and to make it available as Well, what exactly makes gcc-3.4 such a must? I'm trying to decide which debian port to use for production (your comming gcc-3.4 sarge or the already existent gcc-3.3 sarge). -- Jan Houstek
Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
However I am sticking with "pure" Debian for the moment. I have not yet given up on it. I am using everyone's work hosted on Alioth. I will probably deploy an unofficial 'Sarge' on amd64 in a production environment. Eventually an official Debian 'Etch' will replace it. That will probably take around 2-3 years before that happens which means all other major distrubtions will probably already have both an gcc-3.4 and gcc-4.0 amd64 port. Yup. I have to admit, I've been waiting for a splinter group to release Debian Metastable. I really like Debian but the release process seems to be very slow, if not too slow. Is Debian stable even keeping up with hardware advances? Well, kinda. Stable can accept newer 2.4 kernels and new drivers for existing categories of hardware do get added to the 2.4 kernel series. The kernel-package will build them (from kernel.org downloads) in a way that is easy enough to manage. In that sense, you can support many fairly modern peripherals albeit often in a legacy compatibility mode (due to the 'existing categories' constraint). For a server, which is what Stable is supposed to be for, you're probably ok. However, I personally do recommend tieing your server hardware upgrade cycle to Debian's releases, just like Wintel shops tend to tie their upgrades to Microsoft releases, due to the infrequency and inflexibility of each major release. Hardware whose drivers are in 2.6 only will probably be unhappy, even if you go to the trouble of making your Stable machine run a 2.6 kernel using the various unofficial archives. My point of view is that, if you're going to replace so much of the core infrastructure to get 2.6 support, you may as well replace everything else too and go to Testing. Is it even possible to install stable on a new computer and will it take advantage of hardware advances like SATA, Gigaethernet and so on so forth? Ok, enough ranting :) On all my recent machines, the old Stable installer fails to cope with the hardware. In every case, I was forced to use Knoppix (or DFS) to get a runtime environment and then use (c)debootstrap to get the initial install finished. On all except one, I was able to finish the install to Stable, replace the kernel with something more modern and reboot successfully. Some of them became Testing machines later on, of course. The remaining machine couldn't even reboot using Stable, due to the need for kernel features that Stable can't operate without a lot of workarounds, so I had to cdebootstrap directly to Testing from DFS. I haven't tried SATA on Stable. I simply buy the 1000bT cards that are in the 2.4 kernel series and thereby have no trouble. Hope that helps, 8-) PS. If you're embarrassed about ranting on your own, given nobody else seems to be doing so, you obviously haven't read the archives. I suspect (without checking) that everybody on this mailing list has had a good rant on the subject at least once. Anybody who feels excluded by that statement is welcome to jump in. 8-)
Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
Bob Proulx wrote: [snip] Because Ubuntu is based on Debian all of this work is directly benefiting that project. And they have released amd64 and are supporting it. Therefore if you need a released and supported environment for amd64 then Ubuntu is probably the answer. Not if you wish to have a gcc-3.4 environment, as I want. However I am sticking with "pure" Debian for the moment. I have not yet given up on it. I am using everyone's work hosted on Alioth. I will probably deploy an unofficial 'Sarge' on amd64 in a production environment. Eventually an official Debian 'Etch' will replace it. That will probably take around 2-3 years before that happens which means all other major distrubtions will probably already have both an gcc-3.4 and gcc-4.0 amd64 port. I really like Debian but the release process seems to be very slow, if not too slow. Is Debian stable even keeping up with hardware advances? Is it even possible to install stable on a new computer and will it take advantage of hardware advances like SATA, Gigaethernet and so on so forth? Ok, enough ranting :) /Johan - Symbian Software Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales with registered number 4190020 and registered office at 2-6 Boundary Row, Southwark, London, SE1 8HP, UK. This message is intended only for use by the named addressee and may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] and delete the message and any attachments accompanying it immediately. Neither Symbian nor any of its subsidiaries accepts liability for any corruption, interception, amendment, tampering or viruses occurring to this message in transit or for any message sent by its employees which is not in compliance with Symbian corporate policy.
Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
Johan Groth wrote: > Kurt Roeckx wrote: > >Jan Houstek wrote: > >>Kurt Roeckx wrote: > >>>We will atleast have a released version of the sarge repository, with > >>>updates if there are, and security updates. > >> > >>That's good news. Any chance this port will become a part of the official > >>stable in some future release (Sarge 3.1 r1, r2 ...)? > > > >I don't think so. > > Then I have a (maybe a stupid) question. What is the point of doing this > port if it is never going to be part of a stable release? It won't go out in Sarge. But it should go out in Etch. Etch is the next release after Sarge. Because Ubuntu is based on Debian all of this work is directly benefiting that project. And they have released amd64 and are supporting it. Therefore if you need a released and supported environment for amd64 then Ubuntu is probably the answer. However I am sticking with "pure" Debian for the moment. I have not yet given up on it. I am using everyone's work hosted on Alioth. I will probably deploy an unofficial 'Sarge' on amd64 in a production environment. Eventually an official Debian 'Etch' will replace it. Bob signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
On Tuesday 16 November 2004 20:24, Soenke von Stamm wrote: > Am Dienstag, 16. November 2004 10:38 schrieb Johan Groth: > > Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 08:04:31PM +0100, Jan Houstek wrote: > > >>On Mon, 15 Nov 2004, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > >>>We will atleast have a released version of the sarge repository, with > > >>>updates if there are, and security updates. > > >> > > >>That's good news. Any chance this port will become a part of the > > >> official stable in some future release (Sarge 3.1 r1, r2 ...)? > > > > > > I don't think so. > > > > Then I have a (maybe a stupid) question. What is the point of doing this > > port if it is never going to be part of a stable release? > > > > /Johan > > Er, rough guess: it's being done because many people like you and me need > it? And I expect it to be in debian 3.2/4.0. Though I'm not part of any > plans nor have I joined discussion (and only briefly read parts of it). > > What I don't unsderstand though is that many people don't want it in sarge. > I know it would have delayed it even more. At least after WinXP x64 is > released and world+dog have an AMD64/clone (;-) on their tables it'll be > laughable not to have an AMD64 port of debian/stable. And we all know it'll > take another three years until debian 3.2/4.0. > Plus in many companies, something that's called 'testing' or 'unstable' > won't be allowed on production systems, even if it's more mature than any > SuSE etc. ever was. That's a heavy set-back for debian in corporate > environment I think. I also have some trouble here btw. but I can stand it. > > > Sönke > > Yikes! you have an ugly sig ;-p > ...Plus it doesn't start by '-- \n' so it's not cut automatically... Well my guess is that they want to wait for the 128 bit version coming out next summer ;-). Just a guess so ;-o -- kind regards Nils Valentin Tokyo/Japan http://www.be-known-online.com/mysql/
Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
Am Dienstag, 16. November 2004 10:38 schrieb Johan Groth: > Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 08:04:31PM +0100, Jan Houstek wrote: > >>On Mon, 15 Nov 2004, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > >>>We will atleast have a released version of the sarge repository, with > >>>updates if there are, and security updates. > >> > >>That's good news. Any chance this port will become a part of the official > >>stable in some future release (Sarge 3.1 r1, r2 ...)? > > > > I don't think so. > > Then I have a (maybe a stupid) question. What is the point of doing this > port if it is never going to be part of a stable release? > > /Johan Er, rough guess: it's being done because many people like you and me need it? And I expect it to be in debian 3.2/4.0. Though I'm not part of any plans nor have I joined discussion (and only briefly read parts of it). What I don't unsderstand though is that many people don't want it in sarge. I know it would have delayed it even more. At least after WinXP x64 is released and world+dog have an AMD64/clone (;-) on their tables it'll be laughable not to have an AMD64 port of debian/stable. And we all know it'll take another three years until debian 3.2/4.0. Plus in many companies, something that's called 'testing' or 'unstable' won't be allowed on production systems, even if it's more mature than any SuSE etc. ever was. That's a heavy set-back for debian in corporate environment I think. I also have some trouble here btw. but I can stand it. Sönke Yikes! you have an ugly sig ;-p ...Plus it doesn't start by '-- \n' so it's not cut automatically...
Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
Kurt Roeckx wrote: On Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 08:04:31PM +0100, Jan Houstek wrote: On Mon, 15 Nov 2004, Kurt Roeckx wrote: We will atleast have a released version of the sarge repository, with updates if there are, and security updates. That's good news. Any chance this port will become a part of the official stable in some future release (Sarge 3.1 r1, r2 ...)? I don't think so. Then I have a (maybe a stupid) question. What is the point of doing this port if it is never going to be part of a stable release? /Johan - Symbian Software Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales with registered number 4190020 and registered office at 2-6 Boundary Row, Southwark, London, SE1 8HP, UK. This message is intended only for use by the named addressee and may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] and delete the message and any attachments accompanying it immediately. Neither Symbian nor any of its subsidiaries accepts liability for any corruption, interception, amendment, tampering or viruses occurring to this message in transit or for any message sent by its employees which is not in compliance with Symbian corporate policy.
Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
On Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 08:04:31PM +0100, Jan Houstek wrote: > On Mon, 15 Nov 2004, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > > We will atleast have a released version of the sarge repository, with > > updates if there are, and security updates. > > That's good news. Any chance this port will become a part of the official > stable in some future release (Sarge 3.1 r1, r2 ...)? I don't think so. Kurt
Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > We will atleast have a released version of the sarge repository, with > updates if there are, and security updates. That's good news. Any chance this port will become a part of the official stable in some future release (Sarge 3.1 r1, r2 ...)? -- Jan Houstek
Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
On Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 02:39:03AM +0100, Jan Houstek wrote: > Hi. > > I'm a long-term Debian user/admin/advocate, I use the stable version of > Debian GNU/Linux on several tens of production servers. During next few > month I will be deploying several AMD64 machines (dual-Opteron) and I'd > love to use Debian as well. > > If I understand it well, the current port is mostly based on Sarge which > is to be released before end of 2004 (knock, knock). So my questions are: We currently have 3 "archives": -pure64: This is unstable with gcc-3.3 -sarge: This is testing/sarge with gcc-3.3 -gcc-3.4: This is unstable with gcc-3.4 > 1) What will happen with debian-amd64 after Sarge is released? Will it be > freezed or will it continue to follow (new) testing? What about security > updates? unstable and testing (etch) really should be moving to the official mirrors so I don't think we'll keep providing those on alioth. We will of course do until everything is on the official mirrors. We will atleast have a released version of the sarge repository, with updates if there are, and security updates. > 2) Is there any schedule for the official unstable/testing/stable Debian > versions about amd64 adpotion? We haven't actually been told that we'll get on the official mirrors after sarge's release, but we do believe so. Kurt
Re: Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
Hi all! Currently I'm using pure64 repository. Is it worth to switch to gcc-3.4 repository? Can I simply switch to gcc-3.4 and update the system? Which repository will be official AMD64 port - pure64 or gcc-3.4? -- Slava Risenberg
Re: Status of debian-amd64 after sarge release
On 04-Nov-15 02:39, Jan Houstek wrote: > If I understand it well, the current port is mostly based on Sarge which > is to be released before end of 2004 (knock, knock). So my questions are: > > 1) What will happen with debian-amd64 after Sarge is released? Will it be > freezed or will it continue to follow (new) testing? What about security > updates? For the gcc-3.4 archive, my intention is to freeze sarge when it is released and to make it available as deb http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/gcc-3.4 sarge main I will use the gcc-3.4 'sarge' archive for my own servers. Because of this, I will of course apply the official sarge security updates to that archive. For the gcc-3.4 'unstable' archive, the intention is to continue to follow the official 'unstable' distribution until the amd64 port has been officially accepted by Debian and until 'unstable' has switched to gcc-3.4 (or maybe gcc-4.0) as its default compiler. Regards Andreas Jochens
