Re: Safety of Upgrading Unstable
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 06:36:09PM +0800, Isaac To wrote: Just be reminded that an apt upgrade is about to start, and aptitude is currently uninstallable in sid. Hmm, I should get more sleep then, cause I swear I just installed it last weekend to see if it's any different from when I used it before (it's vastly improved, and thankfully uses the same basic keys as dselect now). -- .''`. Baloo [EMAIL PROTECTED] : :' :proud Debian admin and user `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than to fix a system msg31867/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Safety of Upgrading Unstable
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 08:33:02PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: The new apt-listbugs package (in experimental) is also handy; it will query the BTS for RC bugs in the packages apt is about to install/upgrade and warn you about them. Oooh, when can we look forward to seeing this in sid? -- .''`. Baloo [EMAIL PROTECTED] : :' :proud Debian admin and user `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than to fix a system msg31868/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Safety of Upgrading Unstable
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 10:11:36AM -0500, Hall Stevenson wrote: Thing is, someone could have updated their glibc package yesterday with no problem. After that, the developer updated it, broke something, and then you turn around and grab that broken package and then run into major problems ! This happened with 'libpam' many months ago. Basically, if you updated it and logged out, you couldn't log back in... I remember that. I was in a habit of updating daily then, and I happened to forget about updating for a day. When I heard about that, I held back. -- .''`. Baloo [EMAIL PROTECTED] : :' :proud Debian admin and user `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than to fix a system msg31869/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Safety of Upgrading Unstable
On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 03:41:52AM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote: On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 06:36:09PM +0800, Isaac To wrote: Just be reminded that an apt upgrade is about to start, and aptitude is currently uninstallable in sid. Hmm, I should get more sleep then, cause I swear I just installed it last weekend to see if it's any different from when I used it before (it's vastly improved, and thankfully uses the same basic keys as dselect now). If you happen to have kept libsigc++0 around on your system for some other reason, then it'll still be installable. Otherwise it's not: apt needs to make the g++ 3.2 transition first. -- Colin Watson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Safety of Upgrading Unstable
nate == nate [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: nate sounds like your new to debian.. if this is a new installation I nate would reccomend upgrading now. The more experience you have nate dealing with a broken system the better. And if you break your nate current system in it's new state you risk losing less. Chances are nate good that you'll break your system to _some_ extent sooner or nate later, that's just the way it is when running the unstable(or even nate testing) stuff. Just be reminded that an apt upgrade is about to start, and aptitude is currently uninstallable in sid. Regards, Isaac. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Safety of Upgrading Unstable
At 10:56 PM 2/18/2003 -0500, Mark wrote: I installed unstable about a month ago and have had nothing but good times. I've been following debian-devel and debian-user looking for problems people have had with upgrading unstable and haven't seen that many (a few regarding kde / libfam issues). But, I'm curious to know how safe/dangerous it is to just say 'apt-get upgrade' presently. Do an 'apt-get -u upgrade' and it will show you what's going to be installed, removed, upgraded, and so on. If anything listed concerns you, like gcc, glibc, or something, ask... Thing is, someone could have updated their glibc package yesterday with no problem. After that, the developer updated it, broke something, and then you turn around and grab that broken package and then run into major problems ! This happened with 'libpam' many months ago. Basically, if you updated it and logged out, you couldn't log back in... Heh, that's why it's called unstable, 'cause it can be ! Hall -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Safety of Upgrading Unstable
Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I installed unstable about a month ago and have had nothing but good times. ... But, I'm curious to know how safe/dangerous it is to just say 'apt-get upgrade' presently. Presently? Both of my unstable machines work fine (though there is that observation that some packages have dependencies on outdated C++ libraries, notably aptitude). I've been following debian-devel and debian-user looking for problems people have had with upgrading unstable and haven't seen that many (a few regarding kde / libfam issues). This is probably the best way to find out if something is broken in unstable. debian-devel-announce is also a good list to read (and is far lower traffic). And of course, if you find something broken, file a bug report! (http://bugs.debian.org/) However, when I use aptitude to show me what will be upgraded/removed/installed during the upgrade, it is removing some packages that I would think shouldn't be removed. I've generally found it possible to figure out aptitude's reasoning when it wants to delete something. Often this will be because a newer package conflicts with the older one, and you have to pick one or the other to get a consistent state. Try looking under packages which depend on foo on the per-package pages to get some hints on this. -- David Maze [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.debian.org/~dmaze/ Theoretical politics is interesting. Politicking should be illegal. -- Abra Mitchell -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Safety of Upgrading Unstable
David Z Maze [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've been following debian-devel and debian-user looking for problems people have had with upgrading unstable and haven't seen that many (a few regarding kde / libfam issues). This is probably the best way to find out if something is broken in unstable. debian-devel-announce is also a good list to read (and is far lower traffic). And of course, if you find something broken, file a bug report! (http://bugs.debian.org/) Also, the topic of #debian-devel on irc.freenode.net will usually list any major breakage as soon as it's discovered. You'll probably find it there first, because it usually takes a little time to trickle down into the mailing lists. -- On a scale of 1 to 10? It sucked. msg31740/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Safety of Upgrading Unstable
Hall Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At 10:56 PM 2/18/2003 -0500, Mark wrote: I installed unstable about a month ago and have had nothing but good times. I've been following debian-devel and debian-user looking for problems people have had with upgrading unstable and haven't seen that many (a few regarding kde / libfam issues). But, I'm curious to know how safe/dangerous it is to just say 'apt-get upgrade' presently. Do an 'apt-get -u upgrade' and it will show you what's going to be installed, removed, upgraded, and so on. No, it'll only show what's going to be upgraded. An 'apt-get upgrade' will only ever upgrade packages; it won't try to install or remove anything. You must be thinking of 'apt-get dist-upgrade'. -- On a scale of 1 to 10? It sucked. msg31743/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Safety of Upgrading Unstable
Brian Nelson wrote: David Z Maze [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've been following debian-devel and debian-user looking for problems people have had with upgrading unstable and haven't seen that many (a few regarding kde / libfam issues). This is probably the best way to find out if something is broken in unstable. debian-devel-announce is also a good list to read (and is far lower traffic). And of course, if you find something broken, file a bug report! (http://bugs.debian.org/) Also, the topic of #debian-devel on irc.freenode.net will usually list any major breakage as soon as it's discovered. You'll probably find it there first, because it usually takes a little time to trickle down into the mailing lists. The new apt-listbugs package (in experimental) is also handy; it will query the BTS for RC bugs in the packages apt is about to install/upgrade and warn you about them. -- see shy jo msg31794/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Safety of Upgrading Unstable
Mark said: of debian, but this is going to be my first upgrade and don't know how much I should blindly trust these things. Should I upgrade now or wait for the transition to gcc3.2 to end? sounds like your new to debian.. if this is a new installation I would reccomend upgrading now. The more experience you have dealing with a broken system the better. And if you break your current system in it's new state you risk losing less. Chances are good that you'll break your system to _some_ extent sooner or later, that's just the way it is when running the unstable(or even testing) stuff. I personally have never run unstable, when I ran testing(before testing became woody) I upgraded about once every 2 months on average. I run a self built version of afterstep, and do not use GNOME or KDE(though I do rely upon a lot of the gnome libs for some apps that I use). When I upgraded I would exit out of X and do the upgrade there, just for saftey, and don't remember ever having any issues, well none that I could not solve fairly easily(or workaround). at the moment there's nothing in unstable, and only 2 packages in testing that I need which don't warrant an upgrade(just a recompile of those packages on woody). I probably will never understand the need that some people have to use the absolute bleeding edge. nate (loyal debian user since '98) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
