Bug#864017: release-notes: Assumes /etc/apt/sources.list is used (and not /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list or deb822) [general]
Hi Justin, Looks good to me, minus one missing ";". On 28-03-2019 01:16, Justin B Rye wrote: > +The upgrade process described in this chapter has been designed for > +pure Debian stable systems. If your APT configuration mentions > +additional sources besides , or if you have installed packages ^ there. If nobody has further comments, I'll commit this version. Paul signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#864017: release-notes: Assumes /etc/apt/sources.list is used (and not /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list or deb822) [general]
vincent.mcint...@csiro.au wrote: >> >> - Preparing sources for APT >> + Preparing APT source-list files >> >> -Before starting the upgrade you must set up > -role="package">apt's configuration file for package lists, >> -/etc/apt/sources.list. >> +Before starting the upgrade you must reconfigure APT's source-list >> +files (/etc/apt/sources.list.d/ and files under > > I think you want /etc/apt/sources.list here. Thanks. >> +/etc/apt/sources.list.d/). >> >> >> -apt will consider all packages >> that can >> -be found via any deb line, and >> install the package with the >> -highest version number, giving priority to the first line in the >> -file (thus where you have multiple mirror locations, you'd typically >> first name a local >> +APT will consider all packages that can >> +be found via any configured archive, and install the package with the >> +highest version number, giving priority to the first entry in the >> +files (thus where you have multiple mirror locations, you'd typically >> first name a local >> hard disk, then CD-ROMs, and then remote mirrors). > > Possibly avoid the long parenthetical comment here? Oh yes, definitely. > files. Thus, where you have multiple mirror locations, you'd typically > first name a local > hard disk, then CD-ROMs, and then remote mirrors. > > or going slightly further > > files. Thus, where you have multiple mirror locations, list local > hard disks first, then CD-ROMs, and then remote > mirrors. Being really picky, you aren't listing hard disks; the things you're listing are repositories that happen to be *on* local writable storage media. files. Thus, if you have multiple mirror locations, list first the ones on local hard disks, then CD-ROMs, and then remote mirrors. Okay, revised patch using that last version. (I'm using git more or less just as a way of getting colourful diffs...) -- JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package diff --git a/en/old-stuff.dbk b/en/old-stuff.dbk index 0a53d737..3d1b70ed 100644 --- a/en/old-stuff.dbk +++ b/en/old-stuff.dbk @@ -27,14 +27,14 @@ upgraded to the latest point release. -Checking your sources list +Checking your APT source-list files -If any of the lines in your /etc/apt/sources.list -refer to stable, it effectively -points to already. This might not be what you want if -you are not ready yet for the upgrade. If you have already run -apt update, you can still get back without -problems by following the procedure below. + If any of the lines in your APT source-list files (see https://manpages.debian.org//apt/sources.list.5.html;>sources.list(5)) + contain references to stable, this is effectively pointing to + already. This might not be what you want if you are not yet ready + for the upgrade. If you have already run apt update, + you can still get back without problems by following the procedure below. If you have also already installed packages from , there probably @@ -43,28 +43,26 @@ that case you will have to decide for yourself whether you want to continue or not. It is possible to downgrade packages, but that is not covered here. -Open the file /etc/apt/sources.list with your favorite -editor (as root) and check all lines beginning with -deb http:, deb https:, -deb tor+http:, deb tor+https: or -deb ftp: for a reference to -stable. If you find any, change -stable to . + As root, open the relevant APT source-list file (such as + /etc/apt/sources.list) with your favorite + editor, and check all lines beginning with + deb http:, deb https:, + deb tor+http:, deb tor+https:, + URIs: http:, URIs: https:, + URIs: tor+http: or URIs: tor+https: + for a reference to stable. If you find + any, change stable to . - - -Lines in sources.list starting with deb ftp: and pointing to debian.org -addresses should be changed into deb http: lines. - - -If you have any lines starting with deb file:, you will have -to check for yourself if the location they refer to contains an - or a archive. + If you have any lines starting with deb file: or + URIs: file:, you will have + to check for yourself if the location they refer to contains a + or archive. -Do not change any lines that begin with deb cdrom:. +Do not change any lines that begin with deb cdrom: or +URIs: cdrom:. Doing so would invalidate the line and you would have to run apt-cdrom again. Do not be alarmed if a cdrom: source line refers to unstable. diff --git a/en/upgrading.dbk b/en/upgrading.dbk index a22924f3..f97d5634 100644 --- a/en/upgrading.dbk +++ b/en/upgrading.dbk @@ -244,16 +244,26 @@ - Checking system status + Checking APT configuration status -The upgrade process described in this chapter has been designed for upgrades -from pure
Bug#864017: release-notes: Assumes /etc/apt/sources.list is used (and not /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list or deb822) [general]
On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 06:44:29PM +, Justin B Rye wrote: > Justin B Rye wrote: > > Sorry, I've run out of coffee! I'll have another look at this > > tomorrow. > > I'm still only running on cheap freeze-dried instant coffee, so the > attached patch will probably still need work, but I think the > reordering of paragraphs makes sense. > > In particular: > > diff --git a/en/old-stuff.dbk b/en/old-stuff.dbk > > index 0a53d737..3d1b70ed 100644 > > --- a/en/old-stuff.dbk > > +++ b/en/old-stuff.dbk > > @@ -27,14 +27,14 @@ upgraded to the latest point release. > > > > > > > > -Checking your sources list > > +Checking your APT source-list files > > > > -If any of the lines in your /etc/apt/sources.list > > -refer to stable, it effectively > > -points to already. This might not be what you want if > > -you are not ready yet for the upgrade. If you have already run > > -apt update, you can still get back without > > -problems by following the procedure below. > > + If any of the lines in your APT source-list files (see > + > > url="https://manpages.debian.org//apt/sources.list.5.html;>sources.list(5)) > > + contain references to stable, this is > > effectively pointing to > > + already. This might not be what you want if you are not > > yet ready > > + for the upgrade. If you have already run apt update, > > + you can still get back without problems by following the procedure below. > > > > I've let this keep a fuller explanation instead of a crossreference, > partly because I haven't figured out how crossreferences work yet. > > [,,,] > > index a22924f3..d241de1f 100644 > > --- a/en/upgrading.dbk > > +++ b/en/upgrading.dbk > > @@ -244,16 +244,26 @@ > > > > > > > > - Checking system status > > + Checking APT configuration status > > "System" could mean anything; all the following checks deal with the > status of the package management system in particular. > > > > > -The upgrade process described in this chapter has been designed for > > upgrades > > -from pure systems without third-party > > packages. > > -For the greatest reliability of the > > -upgrade process, you may wish to remove third-party packages from your > > system > > -before you begin upgrading. > > +The upgrade process described in this chapter has been designed for > > +pure Debian stable systems. If your APT configuration > > mentions > > +additional sources besides , or if you have installed > > packages > > +from other releases or from third parties, then to ensure a reliable > > upgrade > > +process you may wish to begin by removing these complicating factors. > > > > > > -Below there are two methods for finding such packages by using either > > +The main configuration file that APT uses to decide what sources it > > should > > +download packages from is /etc/apt/sources.list, > > but > > +it can also use files in the > > /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ > > +directory - for details see > + > > url="https://manpages.debian.org//apt/sources.list.5.html;>sources.list(5). > > +If your system is using multiple source-list files then you will need > > to ensure > > +they stay consistent. > > + > > Inserting the main "first" introduction of the concept of APT > sources-list files, and adding the point that having a whole > collection of different /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list files pointing > at different releases is a bad idea. > > > + > > +Below there are two methods for finding installed packages that > > +did not come from Debian, using either > > aptitude or apt-forktracer. > > Please > > note that neither of them are 100% accurate (e.g. the aptitude example > > will list packages that were once provided by Debian but no longer > > are, such as > > old kernel packages). > > Incidentally, why is it bad that aptitude will detect the fact you've > got an obsolete kernel installed? On a stable system, it must be: > * a homebrew kernel-package; or > * an ancient relic from or at least > * a leftover from an old point release; > and any of these would be things you should consider > removing/replacing before the upgrade, i.e. a "true positive". > -- > JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian > sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package > diff --git a/en/old-stuff.dbk b/en/old-stuff.dbk > index 0a53d737..3d1b70ed 100644 > --- a/en/old-stuff.dbk > +++ b/en/old-stuff.dbk > @@ -27,14 +27,14 @@ upgraded to the latest point release. > > > > -Checking your sources list > +Checking your APT source-list files > > -If any of the lines in your /etc/apt/sources.list > -refer to stable, it effectively > -points to already. This might not be what you want if > -you are not ready yet for the upgrade. If you have already run > -apt update, you can still get back without > -problems by following the procedure below. > + If any of the
Bug#864017: release-notes: Assumes /etc/apt/sources.list is used (and not /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list or deb822) [general]
Justin B Rye wrote: > Sorry, I've run out of coffee! I'll have another look at this > tomorrow. I'm still only running on cheap freeze-dried instant coffee, so the attached patch will probably still need work, but I think the reordering of paragraphs makes sense. In particular: > diff --git a/en/old-stuff.dbk b/en/old-stuff.dbk > index 0a53d737..3d1b70ed 100644 > --- a/en/old-stuff.dbk > +++ b/en/old-stuff.dbk > @@ -27,14 +27,14 @@ upgraded to the latest point release. > > > > -Checking your sources list > +Checking your APT source-list files > > -If any of the lines in your /etc/apt/sources.list > -refer to stable, it effectively > -points to already. This might not be what you want if > -you are not ready yet for the upgrade. If you have already run > -apt update, you can still get back without > -problems by following the procedure below. > + If any of the lines in your APT source-list files (see + > url="https://manpages.debian.org//apt/sources.list.5.html;>sources.list(5)) > + contain references to stable, this is > effectively pointing to > + already. This might not be what you want if you are not yet > ready > + for the upgrade. If you have already run apt update, > + you can still get back without problems by following the procedure below. > I've let this keep a fuller explanation instead of a crossreference, partly because I haven't figured out how crossreferences work yet. [,,,] > index a22924f3..d241de1f 100644 > --- a/en/upgrading.dbk > +++ b/en/upgrading.dbk > @@ -244,16 +244,26 @@ > > > > - Checking system status > + Checking APT configuration status "System" could mean anything; all the following checks deal with the status of the package management system in particular. > > -The upgrade process described in this chapter has been designed for > upgrades > -from pure systems without third-party > packages. > -For the greatest reliability of the > -upgrade process, you may wish to remove third-party packages from your > system > -before you begin upgrading. > +The upgrade process described in this chapter has been designed for > +pure Debian stable systems. If your APT configuration > mentions > +additional sources besides , or if you have installed > packages > +from other releases or from third parties, then to ensure a reliable > upgrade > +process you may wish to begin by removing these complicating factors. > > > -Below there are two methods for finding such packages by using either > +The main configuration file that APT uses to decide what sources it > should > +download packages from is /etc/apt/sources.list, but > +it can also use files in the > /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ > +directory - for details see + > url="https://manpages.debian.org//apt/sources.list.5.html;>sources.list(5). > +If your system is using multiple source-list files then you will need to > ensure > +they stay consistent. > + Inserting the main "first" introduction of the concept of APT sources-list files, and adding the point that having a whole collection of different /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list files pointing at different releases is a bad idea. > + > +Below there are two methods for finding installed packages that > +did not come from Debian, using either > aptitude or apt-forktracer. Please > note that neither of them are 100% accurate (e.g. the aptitude example > will list packages that were once provided by Debian but no longer are, > such as > old kernel packages). Incidentally, why is it bad that aptitude will detect the fact you've got an obsolete kernel installed? On a stable system, it must be: * a homebrew kernel-package; or * an ancient relic from or at least * a leftover from an old point release; and any of these would be things you should consider removing/replacing before the upgrade, i.e. a "true positive". -- JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package diff --git a/en/old-stuff.dbk b/en/old-stuff.dbk index 0a53d737..3d1b70ed 100644 --- a/en/old-stuff.dbk +++ b/en/old-stuff.dbk @@ -27,14 +27,14 @@ upgraded to the latest point release. -Checking your sources list +Checking your APT source-list files -If any of the lines in your /etc/apt/sources.list -refer to stable, it effectively -points to already. This might not be what you want if -you are not ready yet for the upgrade. If you have already run -apt update, you can still get back without -problems by following the procedure below. + If any of the lines in your APT source-list files (see https://manpages.debian.org//apt/sources.list.5.html;>sources.list(5)) + contain references to stable, this is effectively pointing to + already. This might not be what you want if you are not yet ready + for the upgrade. If you have already run apt update, + you can still get
Bug#864017: release-notes: Assumes /etc/apt/sources.list is used (and not /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list or deb822) [general]
Paul Gevers wrote: >>> we mean by "APT source-list files", if only by pointing at >>> sources.list(5). >> >> I wanted to link to that man page as well, so let's find a place. I'm >> nearly of to bed now, so if you find a good spot before I do tomorrow, >> don't hesitate to mail. > > I have added a link to the manpages (3 places), but I am not totally > happy with how it reads. > > What do you think? I don't know whether we're "allowed" to link to manpages.d.o here; the only other place I see a man page pointer is in whats-new.dbk, which just says See the cryptsetup manpage On the other hand if we *are* going to point at manpages.d.o there are probably lots of other places where it might help. Reading through the patch: > From 710a6ac851e47e6952087aec89a5b7e8397cf9be Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Paul Gevers > Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 20:31:48 +0100 > Subject: [PATCH] Generalize use of APT source-list files > > Closes: #864017 > --- > en/old-stuff.dbk | 36 ++-- > en/upgrading.dbk | 85 +--- > 2 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/en/old-stuff.dbk b/en/old-stuff.dbk > index 0a53d737..ec26ca91 100644 > --- a/en/old-stuff.dbk > +++ b/en/old-stuff.dbk > @@ -27,14 +27,14 @@ upgraded to the latest point release. > > > > -Checking your sources list > +Checking your APT source-list files > > -If any of the lines in your /etc/apt/sources.list > -refer to stable, it effectively > -points to already. This might not be what you want if > -you are not ready yet for the upgrade. If you have already run > -apt update, you can still get back without > -problems by following the procedure below. > + If any of the lines in your APT source-list files (see + > url="https://manpages.debian.org//apt/sources.list.5.en.html;>sources.list(5)) > + refer to stable, it effectively points to > + already. This might not be what you want if you are not ready > + yet for the upgrade. If you have already run apt > update, > + you can still get back without problems by following the procedure below. > Instead of trying to cram this into parentheses we should explain it more fully the first time we mention it: The main configuration file that APT uses to decide what sources it should download packages from is /etc/apt/sources.list, but it can also use files in the /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ directory - for details see https://manpages.debian.org//apt/sources.list.5.html;>sources.list(5). If your system is using multiple source-list files then you will need to ensure they stay consistent. If any of your APT source-list files contain references to stable, this is effectively pointing to already. This might not be what you want if you are not yet ready for the upgrade. If you have already run apt update, you can still get back without problems by following the procedure below. Note that I've subtracted the ".en" component from the manpage URL; but it's possible that the URL should be defined in release-notes.ent instead. Oh, wait, I hadn't realised that old-stuff.dbk is only alphabetically the first section; it gets turned into an appendix. So instead the paragraph giving the full explanation should go in upgrading.dbk, and then this paragraph in old-stuff.dbk should just refer back to that: If any of your APT source-list files (see ) contain references to stable, this is effectively pointing to > > If you have also already installed packages from , there > probably > @@ -43,28 +43,28 @@ that case you will have to decide for yourself whether > you want to continue or > not. It is possible to downgrade packages, but that is not covered here. > > > -Open the file /etc/apt/sources.list with your favorite > + Open the relevant APT source-list file, e.g. > + /etc/apt/sources.list, with your favorite > editor (as root) and check all lines beginning with It might be a good idea to rearrange this sentence: As root, open the relevant APT source-list file (such as /etc/apt/sources.list) with your favorite editor, and check all lines beginning with > deb http:, deb https:, > -deb tor+http:, deb tor+https: or > -deb ftp: for a reference to > +deb tor+http:, deb tor+https:, > +URIs: http:, > +URIs: https:, > +URIs: tor+http: or URIs: tor+https: > +for a reference to > stable. If you find any, change > stable to . > > - > - > -Lines in sources.list starting with deb ftp: and pointing > to debian.org > -addresses should be changed into deb http: lines. > - > - > > -If you have any lines starting with deb file:, you will > have > + If you have any lines starting with deb file: or > + URIs: file:, you will have > to check for yourself if the location they refer to contains an > or a archive. > I've just noticed: "contains AN "? There has only been one releasename beginning with a
Bug#864017: release-notes: Assumes /etc/apt/sources.list is used (and not /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list or deb822) [general]
Hi, On 25-03-2019 22:13, Paul Gevers wrote: > On 24-03-2019 23:27, Justin B Rye wrote: >> Also, when we first mention APT configuration we need to set out what >> we mean by "APT source-list files", if only by pointing at >> sources.list(5). > > I wanted to link to that man page as well, so let's find a place. I'm > nearly of to bed now, so if you find a good spot before I do tomorrow, > don't hesitate to mail. I have added a link to the manpages (3 places), but I am not totally happy with how it reads. What do you think? Paul From 710a6ac851e47e6952087aec89a5b7e8397cf9be Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Paul Gevers Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 20:31:48 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Generalize use of APT source-list files Closes: #864017 --- en/old-stuff.dbk | 36 ++-- en/upgrading.dbk | 85 +--- 2 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-) diff --git a/en/old-stuff.dbk b/en/old-stuff.dbk index 0a53d737..ec26ca91 100644 --- a/en/old-stuff.dbk +++ b/en/old-stuff.dbk @@ -27,14 +27,14 @@ upgraded to the latest point release. -Checking your sources list +Checking your APT source-list files -If any of the lines in your /etc/apt/sources.list -refer to stable, it effectively -points to already. This might not be what you want if -you are not ready yet for the upgrade. If you have already run -apt update, you can still get back without -problems by following the procedure below. + If any of the lines in your APT source-list files (see https://manpages.debian.org//apt/sources.list.5.en.html;>sources.list(5)) + refer to stable, it effectively points to + already. This might not be what you want if you are not ready + yet for the upgrade. If you have already run apt update, + you can still get back without problems by following the procedure below. If you have also already installed packages from , there probably @@ -43,28 +43,28 @@ that case you will have to decide for yourself whether you want to continue or not. It is possible to downgrade packages, but that is not covered here. -Open the file /etc/apt/sources.list with your favorite + Open the relevant APT source-list file, e.g. + /etc/apt/sources.list, with your favorite editor (as root) and check all lines beginning with deb http:, deb https:, -deb tor+http:, deb tor+https: or -deb ftp: for a reference to +deb tor+http:, deb tor+https:, +URIs: http:, +URIs: https:, +URIs: tor+http: or URIs: tor+https: +for a reference to stable. If you find any, change stable to . - - -Lines in sources.list starting with deb ftp: and pointing to debian.org -addresses should be changed into deb http: lines. - - -If you have any lines starting with deb file:, you will have + If you have any lines starting with deb file: or + URIs: file:, you will have to check for yourself if the location they refer to contains an or a archive. -Do not change any lines that begin with deb cdrom:. +Do not change any lines that begin with deb cdrom: or +URIs: cdrom:. Doing so would invalidate the line and you would have to run apt-cdrom again. Do not be alarmed if a cdrom: source line refers to unstable. diff --git a/en/upgrading.dbk b/en/upgrading.dbk index a22924f3..54a6eb9f 100644 --- a/en/upgrading.dbk +++ b/en/upgrading.dbk @@ -290,12 +290,14 @@ $ apt-forktracer | sort Because of this you should review if there are any pending actions in the - package manager aptitude. If a package is scheduled for - removal or update in the package manager, it might negatively impact the - upgrade procedure. Note that correcting this is only possible if your - sources.list still points to - and not to stable or ; see . + package manager aptitude. If a package is scheduled + for removal or update in the package manager, it might negatively impact + the upgrade procedure. Note that correcting this is only possible if + your APT source-list files, i.e. the files described in the https://manpages.debian.org//apt/sources.list.5.en.html;>sources.list(5) + manpage, still point to and not to + stable or ; see + . To perform this review, launch aptitude in full-terminal mode and @@ -381,7 +383,7 @@ $ apt-forktracer | sort If there is anything you need to fix, it is best to make sure your - sources.list still refers to as explained in . @@ -389,23 +391,23 @@ $ apt-forktracer | sort The proposed-updates section - If you have listed the proposed-updates section - in your /etc/apt/sources.list file, you - should remove it from that file before attempting to upgrade your - system. This is a precaution to reduce the likelihood of - conflicts. + If you have listed the proposed-updates section in + your APT source-list files, you should remove it from those files before + attempting
Bug#864017: release-notes: Assumes /etc/apt/sources.list is used (and not /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list or deb822) [general]
Hi Justin, On 24-03-2019 23:27, Justin B Rye wrote: > Paul Gevers wrote: >>> Justin Rye (#863975): Incidentally, the release-notes mention /etc/apt/sources.list plenty of times but never /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list files; and soon we'll also have the option of deb822-style .sources files - see the sources.list(5) in stretch. We'll need to come up with a generic term and use that instead; I'd suggest "APT source-list files". >> >> I gave this a first shot. What do you think of the attached patch >> (should we do this via Salsa merge requests)? > > (I know nothing of git, and am therefore finding salsa considerably > harder to use than the old alioth setup, but I'm hoping to get it > worked out in time to contribute with the release notes.) Have you already looked at the web interface for commenting on merge requests? No knowledge of git required what so ever. > All of the changes in your diff look good to me, though there's a typo > here: > >> >> -Lines in sources.list starting with deb ftp: and >> pointing to debian.org >> -addresses should be changed into deb http: lines. >> +Lines in APT source-list files starting with deb >> ftp: or >> +URIs: ftp:and pointing to debian.org > ^ > extra space needed Fixed (updated patch attached for the changes in the previous bug as well). > More importantly, the FTP servers were shut down in April 2017, so > this update was required for Jessie-to-Stretch, wasn't it? At any > rate, I find it hard to imagine very many machines as cobwebby as this > would be using a deb822-format APT config with "URIs: ftp:"! So, should we drop that paragraph altogether? I was wondering about that as well. > Also, when we first mention APT configuration we need to set out what > we mean by "APT source-list files", if only by pointing at > sources.list(5). I wanted to link to that man page as well, so let's find a place. I'm nearly of to bed now, so if you find a good spot before I do tomorrow, don't hesitate to mail. Paul From 58b3e890479278d4ac5862c87beaf65f137e7f12 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Paul Gevers Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 20:31:48 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Generalize use of APT source-list files Closes: #864017 --- en/old-stuff.dbk | 25 +++-- en/upgrading.dbk | 72 +--- 2 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-) diff --git a/en/old-stuff.dbk b/en/old-stuff.dbk index 0a53d737..13583ab1 100644 --- a/en/old-stuff.dbk +++ b/en/old-stuff.dbk @@ -27,9 +27,9 @@ upgraded to the latest point release. -Checking your sources list +Checking your APT source-list files -If any of the lines in your /etc/apt/sources.list +If any of the lines in your APT source-list files refer to stable, it effectively points to already. This might not be what you want if you are not ready yet for the upgrade. If you have already run @@ -43,28 +43,35 @@ that case you will have to decide for yourself whether you want to continue or not. It is possible to downgrade packages, but that is not covered here. -Open the file /etc/apt/sources.list with your favorite + Open the relevant APT source-list file, e.g. + /etc/apt/sources.list, with your favorite editor (as root) and check all lines beginning with deb http:, deb https:, -deb tor+http:, deb tor+https: or -deb ftp: for a reference to +deb tor+http:, deb tor+https:, +deb ftp:, URIs: http:, +URIs: https:, +URIs: tor+http:, URIs: tor+https: or +URIs: ftp: for a reference to stable. If you find any, change stable to . -Lines in sources.list starting with deb ftp: and pointing to debian.org -addresses should be changed into deb http: lines. +Lines in APT source-list files starting with deb ftp: or +URIs: ftp: and pointing to debian.org +addresses should be changed into deb http: lines. -If you have any lines starting with deb file:, you will have + If you have any lines starting with deb file: or + URIs: file:, you will have to check for yourself if the location they refer to contains an or a archive. -Do not change any lines that begin with deb cdrom:. +Do not change any lines that begin with deb cdrom: or +URIs: cdrom:. Doing so would invalidate the line and you would have to run apt-cdrom again. Do not be alarmed if a cdrom: source line refers to unstable. diff --git a/en/upgrading.dbk b/en/upgrading.dbk index a22924f3..5f9e6d8d 100644 --- a/en/upgrading.dbk +++ b/en/upgrading.dbk @@ -293,7 +293,7 @@ $ apt-forktracer | sort package manager aptitude. If a package is scheduled for removal or update in the package manager, it might negatively impact the upgrade procedure. Note that correcting this is only possible if your - sources.list still points to + APT source-list files still point to and not to stable or ; see . @@
Bug#864017: release-notes: Assumes /etc/apt/sources.list is used (and not /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list or deb822) [general]
Paul Gevers wrote: >> Justin Rye (#863975): >>> Incidentally, the release-notes mention /etc/apt/sources.list plenty >>> of times but never /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list files; and soon >>> we'll also have the option of deb822-style .sources files - see the >>> sources.list(5) in stretch. We'll need to come up with a generic term >>> and use that instead; I'd suggest "APT source-list files". > > I gave this a first shot. What do you think of the attached patch > (should we do this via Salsa merge requests)? (I know nothing of git, and am therefore finding salsa considerably harder to use than the old alioth setup, but I'm hoping to get it worked out in time to contribute with the release notes.) All of the changes in your diff look good to me, though there's a typo here: > > -Lines in sources.list starting with deb ftp: and pointing > to debian.org > -addresses should be changed into deb http: lines. > +Lines in APT source-list files starting with deb ftp: > or > +URIs: ftp:and pointing to debian.org ^ extra space needed More importantly, the FTP servers were shut down in April 2017, so this update was required for Jessie-to-Stretch, wasn't it? At any rate, I find it hard to imagine very many machines as cobwebby as this would be using a deb822-format APT config with "URIs: ftp:"! Also, when we first mention APT configuration we need to set out what we mean by "APT source-list files", if only by pointing at sources.list(5). -- JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package
Bug#864017: release-notes: Assumes /etc/apt/sources.list is used (and not /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list or deb822) [general]
Control: tags -1 patch On Sat, 03 Jun 2017 11:55:37 +0200 Niels Thykier wrote: > Package: release-notes > Severity: minor > > Justin Rye (#863975): > > Incidentally, the release-notes mention /etc/apt/sources.list plenty > > of times but never /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list files; and soon > > we'll also have the option of deb822-style .sources files - see the > > sources.list(5) in stretch. We'll need to come up with a generic term > > and use that instead; I'd suggest "APT source-list files". I gave this a first shot. What do you think of the attached patch (should we do this via Salsa merge requests)? Paul From b66a2abe7f870c75799ef5a51add26509720e927 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Paul Gevers Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2019 20:31:48 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Generalize use of APT source-list files Closes: #864017 --- en/old-stuff.dbk | 25 ++-- en/upgrading.dbk | 74 +--- 2 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-) diff --git a/en/old-stuff.dbk b/en/old-stuff.dbk index 0a53d737..5967ab3b 100644 --- a/en/old-stuff.dbk +++ b/en/old-stuff.dbk @@ -27,9 +27,9 @@ upgraded to the latest point release. -Checking your sources list +Checking your APT source-list files -If any of the lines in your /etc/apt/sources.list +If any of the lines in your APT source-list files refer to stable, it effectively points to already. This might not be what you want if you are not ready yet for the upgrade. If you have already run @@ -43,28 +43,35 @@ that case you will have to decide for yourself whether you want to continue or not. It is possible to downgrade packages, but that is not covered here. -Open the file /etc/apt/sources.list with your favorite + Open the relevant APT source-list file, e.g. + /etc/apt/sources.list, with your favorite editor (as root) and check all lines beginning with deb http:, deb https:, -deb tor+http:, deb tor+https: or -deb ftp: for a reference to +deb tor+http:, deb tor+https:, +deb ftp:, URIs: http:, +URIs: https:, +URIs: tor+http:, URIs: tor+https: or +URIs: ftp: for a reference to stable. If you find any, change stable to . -Lines in sources.list starting with deb ftp: and pointing to debian.org -addresses should be changed into deb http: lines. +Lines in APT source-list files starting with deb ftp: or +URIs: ftp:and pointing to debian.org +addresses should be changed into deb http: lines. -If you have any lines starting with deb file:, you will have + If you have any lines starting with deb file: or + URIs: file:, you will have to check for yourself if the location they refer to contains an or a archive. -Do not change any lines that begin with deb cdrom:. +Do not change any lines that begin with deb cdrom: or +URIs: cdrom:. Doing so would invalidate the line and you would have to run apt-cdrom again. Do not be alarmed if a cdrom: source line refers to unstable. diff --git a/en/upgrading.dbk b/en/upgrading.dbk index b779789f..ffaba67a 100644 --- a/en/upgrading.dbk +++ b/en/upgrading.dbk @@ -293,7 +293,7 @@ $ apt-forktracer | sort package manager aptitude. If a package is scheduled for removal or update in the package manager, it might negatively impact the upgrade procedure. Note that correcting this is only possible if your - sources.list still points to + APT source-list files still point to and not to stable or ; see . @@ -381,7 +381,7 @@ $ apt-forktracer | sort If there is anything you need to fix, it is best to make sure your - sources.list still refers to as explained in . @@ -389,23 +389,23 @@ $ apt-forktracer | sort The proposed-updates section - If you have listed the proposed-updates section - in your /etc/apt/sources.list file, you - should remove it from that file before attempting to upgrade your - system. This is a precaution to reduce the likelihood of - conflicts. + If you have listed the proposed-updates section in + your APT source-list files, you should remove it from those files before + attempting to upgrade your system. This is a precaution to reduce the + likelihood of conflicts. Unofficial sources - If you have any non-Debian packages on your system, you should be aware that - these may be removed during the upgrade because of conflicting dependencies. - If these packages were installed by adding an extra package archive in your - /etc/apt/sources.list, you should check if that archive - also offers packages compiled for and change the source line accordingly - at the same time as your source lines for Debian packages. + If you have any non-Debian packages on your system, you should be aware + that these may be removed during the upgrade because of conflicting + dependencies. If these
Bug#864017: release-notes: Assumes /etc/apt/sources.list is used (and not /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list or deb822) [general]
Package: release-notes Severity: minor Justin Rye (#863975): > Incidentally, the release-notes mention /etc/apt/sources.list plenty > of times but never /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list files; and soon > we'll also have the option of deb822-style .sources files - see the > sources.list(5) in stretch. We'll need to come up with a generic term > and use that instead; I'd suggest "APT source-list files".
