Re: Upgrade testing to unstable but debian_version and os-release not changing to sid
On 17/08/2021 15:50, David Wright wrote: > On Tue 17 Aug 2021 at 10:46:49 (+0100), Peter Hillier-Brook wrote: >> On 17/08/2021 02:21, Robbi Nespu wrote: >>> I have been using debian testing (bullseye) for 1 year (plus) and I want >>> to use sid as my daily driver. >>> >>> I change source.list to sid >>> $ cat /etc/apt/sources.list >>> deb http://ftp.jp.debian.org/debian/ sid main contrib non-free >>> deb-src http://ftp.jp.debian.org/debian/ sid main contrib non-free >>> >>> do the update and upgrade ... >>> >>> $ sudo apt-get update >>> $ sudo apt-get dist-upgrade >>> $ sudo apt-get autoremove >>> $ sudo reboot >>> >>> when booted, I checked systemd os-release and debian release still on >>> bullseye codename >>> >>> $ cat /etc/debian_version >>> 11.0 >>> >>> $ cat /etc/os-release >>> PRETTY_NAME="Debian GNU/Linux 11 (bullseye)" >>> NAME="Debian GNU/Linux" >>> VERSION_ID="11" >>> VERSION="11 (bullseye)" >>> VERSION_CODENAME=bullseye >>> ID=debian >>> HOME_URL="https://www.debian.org/"; >>> SUPPORT_URL="https://www.debian.org/support"; >>> BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.debian.org/"; >>> >>> Hurmm.. that is unexpected, are this is normal or did I missed something? >>> >> A similar result occurred here: another update/upgrade/reboot sequence >> fixed it. > > So what does your system print out for the above commands? > And what's the version number and date of your base-files….deb > that's different from 69992 Apr 10 20:55 base-files_11.1_amd64.deb? > > Cheers, > David. > debian_version 11.0 os-release PRETTY_NAME="Debian GNU/Linux 11 (bullseye)" NAME="Debian GNU/Linux" VERSION_ID="11" VERSION="11 (bullseye)" VERSION_CODENAME=bullseye ID=debian HOME_URL="https://www.debian.org/"; SUPPORT_URL="https://www.debian.org/support"; BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.debian.org/"; base-files 11.1 As expected
Re: Upgrade testing to unstable but debian_version and os-release not changing to sid
On Tue 17 Aug 2021 at 10:46:49 (+0100), Peter Hillier-Brook wrote: > On 17/08/2021 02:21, Robbi Nespu wrote: > > I have been using debian testing (bullseye) for 1 year (plus) and I want > > to use sid as my daily driver. > > > > I change source.list to sid > > $ cat /etc/apt/sources.list > > deb http://ftp.jp.debian.org/debian/ sid main contrib non-free > > deb-src http://ftp.jp.debian.org/debian/ sid main contrib non-free > > > > do the update and upgrade ... > > > > $ sudo apt-get update > > $ sudo apt-get dist-upgrade > > $ sudo apt-get autoremove > > $ sudo reboot > > > > when booted, I checked systemd os-release and debian release still on > > bullseye codename > > > > $ cat /etc/debian_version > > 11.0 > > > > $ cat /etc/os-release > > PRETTY_NAME="Debian GNU/Linux 11 (bullseye)" > > NAME="Debian GNU/Linux" > > VERSION_ID="11" > > VERSION="11 (bullseye)" > > VERSION_CODENAME=bullseye > > ID=debian > > HOME_URL="https://www.debian.org/"; > > SUPPORT_URL="https://www.debian.org/support"; > > BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.debian.org/"; > > > > Hurmm.. that is unexpected, are this is normal or did I missed something? > > > A similar result occurred here: another update/upgrade/reboot sequence > fixed it. So what does your system print out for the above commands? And what's the version number and date of your base-files….deb that's different from 69992 Apr 10 20:55 base-files_11.1_amd64.deb? Cheers, David.
Re: Upgrade testing to unstable but debian_version and os-release not changing to sid
On 17/08/2021 02:21, Robbi Nespu wrote: > I have been using debian testing (bullseye) for 1 year (plus) and I want > to use sid as my daily driver. > > I change source.list to sid > $ cat /etc/apt/sources.list > deb http://ftp.jp.debian.org/debian/ sid main contrib non-free > deb-src http://ftp.jp.debian.org/debian/ sid main contrib non-free > > do the update and upgrade ... > > $ sudo apt-get update > $ sudo apt-get dist-upgrade > $ sudo apt-get autoremove > $ sudo reboot > > when booted, I checked systemd os-release and debian release still on > bullseye codename > > $ cat /etc/debian_version > 11.0 > > $ cat /etc/os-release > PRETTY_NAME="Debian GNU/Linux 11 (bullseye)" > NAME="Debian GNU/Linux" > VERSION_ID="11" > VERSION="11 (bullseye)" > VERSION_CODENAME=bullseye > ID=debian > HOME_URL="https://www.debian.org/"; > SUPPORT_URL="https://www.debian.org/support"; > BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.debian.org/"; > > Hurmm.. that is unexpected, are this is normal or did I missed something? > A similar result occurred here: another update/upgrade/reboot sequence fixed it.
Re: Upgrade testing to unstable but debian_version and os-release not changing to sid
That great knowing it nothing wrong.. well then I just wait, since it nothing much and my source.list is correct -- Robbi Nespu D311 B5FF EEE6 0BE8 9C91 FA9E 0C81 FA30 3B3A 80BA https://robbinespu.gitlab.io | https://mstdn.social/@robbinespu
Re: Upgrade testing to unstable but debian_version and os-release not changing to sid
On Mon 16 Aug 2021 at 21:47:08 (-0400), Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 09:21:52AM +0800, Robbi Nespu wrote: > > $ cat /etc/debian_version > > 11.0 > > > > $ cat /etc/os-release > > PRETTY_NAME="Debian GNU/Linux 11 (bullseye)" > > NAME="Debian GNU/Linux" > > VERSION_ID="11" > > VERSION="11 (bullseye)" > > VERSION_CODENAME=bullseye > > ID=debian > > HOME_URL="https://www.debian.org/"; > > SUPPORT_URL="https://www.debian.org/support"; > > BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.debian.org/"; > > > > Hurmm.. that is unexpected, are this is normal or did I missed something? > > Be patient. A new base-files package hasn't been uploaded into unstable > yet. I'm sure it'll happen sooner or later. > > https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=base-files And even then, take note of /usr/share/doc/base-files/README: “Q. Why "bookworm/sid" and not "testing/unstable" as it used to be? “A. The codename is a little bit more informative, as the meaning of "testing" changes over time. “Q. Ok, but how do I know which distribution I'm running? “A. If you are running testing or unstable, then /etc/debian_version is not a reliable way to know that anymore. Looking at the contents of your /etc/apt/sources.list file is probably a much better way.” Cheers, David.
Re: Upgrade testing to unstable but debian_version and os-release not changing to sid
On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 09:21:52AM +0800, Robbi Nespu wrote: > $ cat /etc/debian_version > 11.0 > > $ cat /etc/os-release > PRETTY_NAME="Debian GNU/Linux 11 (bullseye)" > NAME="Debian GNU/Linux" > VERSION_ID="11" > VERSION="11 (bullseye)" > VERSION_CODENAME=bullseye > ID=debian > HOME_URL="https://www.debian.org/"; > SUPPORT_URL="https://www.debian.org/support"; > BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.debian.org/"; > > Hurmm.. that is unexpected, are this is normal or did I missed something? Be patient. A new base-files package hasn't been uploaded into unstable yet. I'm sure it'll happen sooner or later. https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=base-files
Upgrade testing to unstable but debian_version and os-release not changing to sid
I have been using debian testing (bullseye) for 1 year (plus) and I want to use sid as my daily driver. I change source.list to sid $ cat /etc/apt/sources.list deb http://ftp.jp.debian.org/debian/ sid main contrib non-free deb-src http://ftp.jp.debian.org/debian/ sid main contrib non-free do the update and upgrade ... $ sudo apt-get update $ sudo apt-get dist-upgrade $ sudo apt-get autoremove $ sudo reboot when booted, I checked systemd os-release and debian release still on bullseye codename $ cat /etc/debian_version 11.0 $ cat /etc/os-release PRETTY_NAME="Debian GNU/Linux 11 (bullseye)" NAME="Debian GNU/Linux" VERSION_ID="11" VERSION="11 (bullseye)" VERSION_CODENAME=bullseye ID=debian HOME_URL="https://www.debian.org/"; SUPPORT_URL="https://www.debian.org/support"; BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.debian.org/"; Hurmm.. that is unexpected, are this is normal or did I missed something? -- Robbi Nespu D311 B5FF EEE6 0BE8 9C91 FA9E 0C81 FA30 3B3A 80BA https://robbinespu.gitlab.io | https://mstdn.social/@robbinespu
Re: Anyone having X problem updating from testing to unstable.
On 5/7/06, Javier-Elias Vasquez-Vivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 5/6/06, Florian Kulzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 15:11:17 -1000, Javier-Elias Vasquez-Vivas wrote: > > On 5/5/06, Florian Kulzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [...] > > >http://wiki.debian.org/Xorg69To7 > > > [...] > > > > [...]. WDM doesn't seem to work here, and > > I've already edited /etc/X11/wdm/Xservers to point to /usr/bin/Xorg, > > but no success. I can live without it, but I'm wondering if there's > > something else that can be done. > > You might have found a new bug. Do you get any error messages when you > restart wdm? After a failed log-in attempt, do find anything interesting > in ~/.xsession-errors? Maybe you have an old config file somewhere with > an incompatible setting; have you tried purging wdm and reinstalling it? > > -- > Regards, > Florian I had to admit I didn't tried purging, just removing and installing again. But I did the purge as well after you mentioned it. Nothing works still though. And weird thing I get NO error under .xsession-errors (I've moved old one somewhere else and created new one, and after wdm gets back to login nothing shows up under .xsession-errors). So somehow I'm unable to get an Xsession from wdm, :-(. I checked /etc/X11/wdm/Xstartup, and it was checking for /usr/bin/X11/xmessage, so I changed that for /usr/bin/xmessage, but that didn't change a thing either. So I'm kind of lost, there's must be a unconnected link somewhere, but I can figure out where. For now I'm removing wdm to avoid it at boot... Thanks, -- Javier -- I tried XDM, and XDM is working fine. So this must be an exclusive WDM issue then. The work around is to use XDM then, :-(. -- Javier --
Re: Anyone having X problem updating from testing to unstable.
On 5/6/06, Florian Kulzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 15:11:17 -1000, Javier-Elias Vasquez-Vivas wrote: > On 5/5/06, Florian Kulzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > >http://wiki.debian.org/Xorg69To7 > > [...] > > [...]. WDM doesn't seem to work here, and > I've already edited /etc/X11/wdm/Xservers to point to /usr/bin/Xorg, > but no success. I can live without it, but I'm wondering if there's > something else that can be done. You might have found a new bug. Do you get any error messages when you restart wdm? After a failed log-in attempt, do find anything interesting in ~/.xsession-errors? Maybe you have an old config file somewhere with an incompatible setting; have you tried purging wdm and reinstalling it? -- Regards, Florian I had to admit I didn't tried purging, just removing and installing again. But I did the purge as well after you mentioned it. Nothing works still though. And weird thing I get NO error under .xsession-errors (I've moved old one somewhere else and created new one, and after wdm gets back to login nothing shows up under .xsession-errors). So somehow I'm unable to get an Xsession from wdm, :-(. I checked /etc/X11/wdm/Xstartup, and it was checking for /usr/bin/X11/xmessage, so I changed that for /usr/bin/xmessage, but that didn't change a thing either. So I'm kind of lost, there's must be a unconnected link somewhere, but I can figure out where. For now I'm removing wdm to avoid it at boot... Thanks, -- Javier --
Re: Anyone having X problem updating from testing to unstable.
On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 15:11:17 -1000, Javier-Elias Vasquez-Vivas wrote: > On 5/5/06, Florian Kulzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > >Check out the Xorg transition wiki first; it has solutions for the most > >common problems related to the upgrade: > > > >http://wiki.debian.org/Xorg69To7 > > > >-- > >Regards, > > Florian > > Thanks a lot, this is pretty helpful. Actually what I was missing was > /etc/X11/Xsession, as the wiki indicates. However there's something > still not working any good yet. WDM doesn't seem to work here, and > I've already edited /etc/X11/wdm/Xservers to point to /usr/bin/Xorg, > but no success. I can live without it, but I'm wondering if there's > something else that can be done. You might have found a new bug. Do you get any error messages when you restart wdm? After a failed log-in attempt, do find anything interesting in ~/.xsession-errors? Maybe you have an old config file somewhere with an incompatible setting; have you tried purging wdm and reinstalling it? -- Regards, Florian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Anyone having X problem updating from testing to unstable.
On 5/5/06, Florian Kulzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 15:58:28 -0600, Javier-Elias Vasquez-Vivas wrote: > It looks like the modularized Xorg finally got into unstable, which is > good news I believe. Only problem is that I moved from testing to > unstable, and although I can start X up by running just X, now I can't > get an X session from wdm for example neither startx. > > I'm sure I'm just missing some packages because in testing there's a > monolitic X as opposed to the modularized one in unstable, but I have > no idea which ones I'm missing. > > Can some one provide a list of basic packages now required to run X > (xorg) sessions under unstable? Check out the Xorg transition wiki first; it has solutions for the most common problems related to the upgrade: http://wiki.debian.org/Xorg69To7 -- Regards, Florian Thanks a lot, this is pretty helpful. Actually what I was missing was /etc/X11/Xsession, as the wiki indicates. However there's something still not working any good yet. WDM doesn't seem to work here, and I've already edited /etc/X11/wdm/Xservers to point to /usr/bin/Xorg, but no success. I can live without it, but I'm wondering if there's something else that can be done. Thanks again, -- Javier --
Re: Anyone having X problem updating from testing to unstable.
On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 15:58:28 -0600, Javier-Elias Vasquez-Vivas wrote: > It looks like the modularized Xorg finally got into unstable, which is > good news I believe. Only problem is that I moved from testing to > unstable, and although I can start X up by running just X, now I can't > get an X session from wdm for example neither startx. > > I'm sure I'm just missing some packages because in testing there's a > monolitic X as opposed to the modularized one in unstable, but I have > no idea which ones I'm missing. > > Can some one provide a list of basic packages now required to run X > (xorg) sessions under unstable? Check out the Xorg transition wiki first; it has solutions for the most common problems related to the upgrade: http://wiki.debian.org/Xorg69To7 -- Regards, Florian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Anyone having X problem updating from testing to unstable.
It looks like the modularized Xorg finally got into unstable, which is good news I believe. Only problem is that I moved from testing to unstable, and although I can start X up by running just X, now I can't get an X session from wdm for example neither startx. I'm sure I'm just missing some packages because in testing there's a monolitic X as opposed to the modularized one in unstable, but I have no idea which ones I'm missing. Can some one provide a list of basic packages now required to run X (xorg) sessions under unstable? Thanks, -- Javier --
Re: Upgrading from old Sarge (Testing) to Unstable
> Thanks you all for your replies. > > It sounds like I should stick to stable for now at least (till I get more confident about what I'm doing). > > The package I'm most concerned about upgrading is the kernel. I built this from the sources at kernel.org and used a Debian tool (can't remember the name now) to make a .deb file from it and installed ith with dpkg I think. > > Will doing 'apt-get upgrade' or 'apt-get dist-upgrade' install the default kernel? Will it leave mine in the GRUB menu at least? I'd like to make sure that apt-get doesn't overwrite the kernel with the standard prebuilt one - I presume mine will still be in the GRUB menu at least. > > Thanks, > Yasir > I recommend using aptitude instead of apt-get, ie. just replace apt-get update by aptitude dist-upgrade. aptitude is said to be better at resolving conflicts and recommendations. Apart from that it might be worthwhile to read the upgrade instructions from woody to sarge as they might apply to some of your packages: http://www.de.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#s-upgradingpackages aptitude updates existing software, but doesn't remove any software, ie. your kernel will stay. If you installed it via the debian tools, ie. via a .deb package it will be found in the 'Obsolete and locally created packages' section in aptitude. You can later install a new kernel or compile a new kernel, but as said in the release info, I strongly recommend to do this in a separate step: use your existing kernel to see if everything works fine; then add an additional kernel. If it continues to work fine, you can remove the old kernel. Thank you to everyone for replying. I followed the advice given by Johannes and did aptitude dist-upgrade using http://www.us.debian.org/releases/sarge/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html Most things installed ok, but it gave me an error which I'll list below: <...clip up to this point> Setting up abiword-common (2.2.7-3sarge2) ... Errors were encountered while processing: kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386 kernel-pcmcia-modules-2.4.27-2-386 E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) Ack! Something bad happened while installing packages. Trying to recover: Setting up kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386 (2.4.27-10) ... /usr/sbin/mkinitrd: device /dev/hda7 is not a block device Failed to create initrd image. dpkg: error processing kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386 (--configure): subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 9 dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of kernel-pcmcia-modules-2.4.27-2-386: kernel-pcmcia-modules-2.4.27-2-386 depends on kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386; however: Package kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing kernel-pcmcia-modules-2.4.27-2-386 (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386 kernel-pcmcia-modules-2.4.27-2-386 Reading Package Lists... 0% Reading Package Lists... 0% Reading Package Lists... 6% Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... 0% Building Dependency Tree... 0% Building Dependency Tree... 50% Building Dependency Tree... 50% Building Dependency Tree Reading extended state information... 0% Reading extended state information... 0% Reading extended state information... 3% Reading extended state information... 63% Reading extended state information Initializing package states... 0% Initializing package states... Done Reading task descriptions... 0%Reading task descriptions... 2% Reading task descriptions... Done I should say that I originally installed kernel 2.4.x (because it wouldn't boot up when I installed 2.6.x from the Sarge installer) but then I installed 2.6.x myself later, building it myself using make-kpkg. One of the things that changed was that the drive names - I think it might be because of SATA drivers? So for example, /dev/hda became /dev/sda. However, my fstab file still uses hda for some partitions (and still works somehow): $ cat fstab # /etc/fstab: static file system information. # # proc/proc procdefaults0 0 /dev/hda7 / ext3defaults,errors=remount-ro 0 1 /dev/hda6 noneswapsw 0 0 /dev/sda2 /mnt/c ntfsro,umask=0 0 0 /dev/sda5 /mnt/e vfatrw,umask=0 0 0 /dev/hdc/media/cdrom0 iso9660 ro,user,noauto 0 0 /dev/fd0/media/floppy0 autorw,user,noauto 0 0 From above, you can see the / partition is still /dev/hda7 in fstab, even though it should be /dev/sha7. Should I just change all /dev/hda to /dev/sda and run aptitude dist-upgrade again? Will that fix the problem? OK - I changed /dev/hda to /dev/sda in /etc/fstab and did dpkg --configure on kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386 and
Re: Upgrading from old Sarge (Testing) to Unstable
> Thanks you all for your replies. > > It sounds like I should stick to stable for now at least (till I get more confident about what I'm doing). > > The package I'm most concerned about upgrading is the kernel. I built this from the sources at kernel.org and used a Debian tool (can't remember the name now) to make a .deb file from it and installed ith with dpkg I think. > > Will doing 'apt-get upgrade' or 'apt-get dist-upgrade' install the default kernel? Will it leave mine in the GRUB menu at least? I'd like to make sure that apt-get doesn't overwrite the kernel with the standard prebuilt one - I presume mine will still be in the GRUB menu at least. > > Thanks, > Yasir > I recommend using aptitude instead of apt-get, ie. just replace apt-get update by aptitude dist-upgrade. aptitude is said to be better at resolving conflicts and recommendations. Apart from that it might be worthwhile to read the upgrade instructions from woody to sarge as they might apply to some of your packages: http://www.de.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#s-upgradingpackages aptitude updates existing software, but doesn't remove any software, ie. your kernel will stay. If you installed it via the debian tools, ie. via a .deb package it will be found in the 'Obsolete and locally created packages' section in aptitude. You can later install a new kernel or compile a new kernel, but as said in the release info, I strongly recommend to do this in a separate step: use your existing kernel to see if everything works fine; then add an additional kernel. If it continues to work fine, you can remove the old kernel. Thank you to everyone for replying. I followed the advice given by Johannes and did aptitude dist-upgrade using http://www.us.debian.org/releases/sarge/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html Most things installed ok, but it gave me an error which I'll list below: <...clip up to this point> Setting up abiword-common (2.2.7-3sarge2) ... Errors were encountered while processing: kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386 kernel-pcmcia-modules-2.4.27-2-386 E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) Ack! Something bad happened while installing packages. Trying to recover: Setting up kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386 (2.4.27-10) ... /usr/sbin/mkinitrd: device /dev/hda7 is not a block device Failed to create initrd image. dpkg: error processing kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386 (--configure): subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 9 dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of kernel-pcmcia-modules-2.4.27-2-386: kernel-pcmcia-modules-2.4.27-2-386 depends on kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386; however: Package kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing kernel-pcmcia-modules-2.4.27-2-386 (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386 kernel-pcmcia-modules-2.4.27-2-386 Reading Package Lists... 0% Reading Package Lists... 0% Reading Package Lists... 6% Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... 0% Building Dependency Tree... 0% Building Dependency Tree... 50% Building Dependency Tree... 50% Building Dependency Tree Reading extended state information... 0% Reading extended state information... 0% Reading extended state information... 3% Reading extended state information... 63% Reading extended state information Initializing package states... 0% Initializing package states... Done Reading task descriptions... 0%Reading task descriptions... 2% Reading task descriptions... Done I should say that I originally installed kernel 2.4.x (because it wouldn't boot up when I installed 2.6.x from the Sarge installer) but then I installed 2.6.x myself later, building it myself using make-kpkg. One of the things that changed was that the drive names - I think it might be because of SATA drivers? So for example, /dev/hda became /dev/sda. However, my fstab file still uses hda for some partitions (and still works somehow): $ cat fstab # /etc/fstab: static file system information. # # proc/proc procdefaults0 0 /dev/hda7 / ext3defaults,errors=remount-ro 0 1 /dev/hda6 noneswapsw 0 0 /dev/sda2 /mnt/c ntfsro,umask=0 0 0 /dev/sda5 /mnt/e vfatrw,umask=0 0 0 /dev/hdc/media/cdrom0 iso9660 ro,user,noauto 0 0 /dev/fd0/media/floppy0 autorw,user,noauto 0 0 From above, you can see the / partition is still /dev/hda7 in fstab, even though it should be /dev/sha7. Should I just change all /dev/hda to /dev/sda and run aptitude dist-upgrade again? Will that fix the problem? OK - I changed /dev/hda to /dev/sda in /etc/fstab and did dpkg --configure on kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386 and
Re: Upgrading from old Sarge (Testing) to Unstable
> Thanks you all for your replies. > > It sounds like I should stick to stable for now at least (till I get more confident about what I'm doing). > > The package I'm most concerned about upgrading is the kernel. I built this from the sources at kernel.org and used a Debian tool (can't remember the name now) to make a .deb file from it and installed ith with dpkg I think. > > Will doing 'apt-get upgrade' or 'apt-get dist-upgrade' install the default kernel? Will it leave mine in the GRUB menu at least? I'd like to make sure that apt-get doesn't overwrite the kernel with the standard prebuilt one - I presume mine will still be in the GRUB menu at least. > > Thanks, > Yasir > I recommend using aptitude instead of apt-get, ie. just replace apt-get update by aptitude dist-upgrade. aptitude is said to be better at resolving conflicts and recommendations. Apart from that it might be worthwhile to read the upgrade instructions from woody to sarge as they might apply to some of your packages: http://www.de.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#s-upgradingpackages aptitude updates existing software, but doesn't remove any software, ie. your kernel will stay. If you installed it via the debian tools, ie. via a .deb package it will be found in the 'Obsolete and locally created packages' section in aptitude. You can later install a new kernel or compile a new kernel, but as said in the release info, I strongly recommend to do this in a separate step: use your existing kernel to see if everything works fine; then add an additional kernel. If it continues to work fine, you can remove the old kernel. Thank you to everyone for replying. I followed the advice given by Johannes and did aptitude dist-upgrade using http://www.us.debian.org/releases/sarge/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html Most things installed ok, but it gave me an error which I'll list below: <...clip up to this point> Setting up abiword-common (2.2.7-3sarge2) ... Errors were encountered while processing: kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386 kernel-pcmcia-modules-2.4.27-2-386 E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) Ack! Something bad happened while installing packages. Trying to recover: Setting up kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386 (2.4.27-10) ... /usr/sbin/mkinitrd: device /dev/hda7 is not a block device Failed to create initrd image. dpkg: error processing kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386 (--configure): subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 9 dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of kernel-pcmcia-modules-2.4.27-2-386: kernel-pcmcia-modules-2.4.27-2-386 depends on kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386; however: Package kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386 is not configured yet. dpkg: error processing kernel-pcmcia-modules-2.4.27-2-386 (--configure): dependency problems - leaving unconfigured Errors were encountered while processing: kernel-image-2.4.27-2-386 kernel-pcmcia-modules-2.4.27-2-386 Reading Package Lists... 0% Reading Package Lists... 0% Reading Package Lists... 6% Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... 0% Building Dependency Tree... 0% Building Dependency Tree... 50% Building Dependency Tree... 50% Building Dependency Tree Reading extended state information... 0% Reading extended state information... 0% Reading extended state information... 3% Reading extended state information... 63% Reading extended state information Initializing package states... 0% Initializing package states... Done Reading task descriptions... 0% Reading task descriptions... 2% Reading task descriptions... Done I should say that I originally installed kernel 2.4.x (because it wouldn't boot up when I installed 2.6.x from the Sarge installer) but then I installed 2.6.x myself later, building it myself using make-kpkg. One of the things that changed was that the drive names - I think it might be because of SATA drivers? So for example, /dev/hda became /dev/sda. However, my fstab file still uses hda for some partitions (and still works somehow): $ cat fstab # /etc/fstab: static file system information. # # proc/proc procdefaults0 0 /dev/hda7 / ext3defaults,errors=remount-ro 0 1 /dev/hda6 noneswapsw 0 0 /dev/sda2 /mnt/c ntfsro,umask=0 0 0 /dev/sda5 /mnt/e vfatrw,umask=0 0 0 /dev/hdc/media/cdrom0 iso9660 ro,user,noauto 0 0 /dev/fd0/media/floppy0 autorw,user,noauto 0 0 From above, you can see the / partition is still /dev/hda7 in fstab, even though it should be /dev/sha7. Should I just change all /dev/hda to /dev/sda and run aptitude dist-upgrade again? Will that fix the problem? I haven't even rebooted because I don't know what state my system is in. Thanks, Yasir -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [
Re: Upgrading from old Sarge (Testing) to Unstable
Yasir Assam wrote: > Will doing 'apt-get upgrade' or 'apt-get dist-upgrade' install the > default kernel? Will it leave mine in the GRUB menu at least? Doing a dist-upgrade will NOT upgrade the kernel. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Upgrading from old Sarge (Testing) to Unstable
Yasir Assam wrote: > Thanks you all for your replies. > > It sounds like I should stick to stable for now at least (till I get more confident about what I'm doing). > > The package I'm most concerned about upgrading is the kernel. I built this from the sources at kernel.org and used a Debian tool (can't remember the name now) to make a .deb file from it and installed ith with dpkg I think. > > Will doing 'apt-get upgrade' or 'apt-get dist-upgrade' install the default kernel? Will it leave mine in the GRUB menu at least? I'd like to make sure that apt-get doesn't overwrite the kernel with the standard prebuilt one - I presume mine will still be in the GRUB menu at least. > > Thanks, > Yasir > I recommend using aptitude instead of apt-get, ie. just replace apt-get update by aptitude dist-upgrade. aptitude is said to be better at resolving conflicts and recommendations. Apart from that it might be worthwhile to read the upgrade instructions from woody to sarge as they might apply to some of your packages: http://www.de.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#s-upgradingpackages aptitude updates existing software, but doesn't remove any software, ie. your kernel will stay. If you installed it via the debian tools, ie. via a .deb package it will be found in the 'Obsolete and locally created packages' section in aptitude. You can later install a new kernel or compile a new kernel, but as said in the release info, I strongly recommend to do this in a separate step: use your existing kernel to see if everything works fine; then add an additional kernel. If it continues to work fine, you can remove the old kernel. Johannes -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Upgrading from old Sarge (Testing) to Unstable
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 04:58:00PM +1100, Yasir Assam wrote: > Thanks you all for your replies. > > It sounds like I should stick to stable for now at least (till I get > more confident about what I'm doing). > Update to stable. Do it gradually, taking ten or twenty packages at a time and resolving any dependency clashes as they arise - doing 300+ at once may be asking for trouble. > The package I'm most concerned about upgrading is the kernel. I built > this from the sources at kernel.org and used a Debian tool (can't > remember the name now) to make a .deb file from it and installed ith > with dpkg I think. make-kpkg ?? > > Will doing 'apt-get upgrade' or 'apt-get dist-upgrade' install the > default kernel? Will it leave mine in the GRUB menu at least? I'd like > to make sure that apt-get doesn't overwrite the kernel with the standard > prebuilt one - I presume mine will still be in the GRUB menu at least. > It will probably install a default kernel but yours should still be available. > Thanks, > Yasir > No problem. Andy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Upgrading from old Sarge (Testing) to Unstable
Thanks you all for your replies. It sounds like I should stick to stable for now at least (till I get more confident about what I'm doing). The package I'm most concerned about upgrading is the kernel. I built this from the sources at kernel.org and used a Debian tool (can't remember the name now) to make a .deb file from it and installed ith with dpkg I think. Will doing 'apt-get upgrade' or 'apt-get dist-upgrade' install the default kernel? Will it leave mine in the GRUB menu at least? I'd like to make sure that apt-get doesn't overwrite the kernel with the standard prebuilt one - I presume mine will still be in the GRUB menu at least. Thanks, Yasir Yasir Assam wrote: Hello, I installed DVDs of Sarge when it was the testing distribution (before the 3.1 release). Specifically I installed a snapshot dated 30 April 2005. When I installed it the following lines were added to /etc/apt/sources.list: deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux testing _Sarge_ - Official Snapshot i386 Binary-3 (20050430)]/ unstable contrib main deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux testing _Sarge_ - Official Snapshot i386 Binary-2 (20050430)]/ unstable contrib main deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux testing _Sarge_ - Official Snapshot i386 Binary-1 (20050430)]/ unstable contrib main I now have broadband and would like to upgrade to the Unstable dist. What's the best way of doing this? I added the following line to sources.list: deb http://mirror.aarnet.edu.au/debian unstable main contrib non-free and then did the following: # apt-get update Is it safe just to issue the following command? $ apt-get upgrade With all the transitions that are taking place right now in unstable, I would be very cautious in upgrading to unstable at this moment. However if you are brave enough then you can use the above command. It is safe in the sense that it will not remove any packages from your system and it will not mess up your configuration files etc., bye raju -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Upgrading from old Sarge (Testing) to Unstable
Yasir Assam wrote: Hello, I installed DVDs of Sarge when it was the testing distribution (before the 3.1 release). Specifically I installed a snapshot dated 30 April 2005. When I installed it the following lines were added to /etc/apt/sources.list: deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux testing _Sarge_ - Official Snapshot i386 Binary-3 (20050430)]/ unstable contrib main deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux testing _Sarge_ - Official Snapshot i386 Binary-2 (20050430)]/ unstable contrib main deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux testing _Sarge_ - Official Snapshot i386 Binary-1 (20050430)]/ unstable contrib main I now have broadband and would like to upgrade to the Unstable dist. What's the best way of doing this? I added the following line to sources.list: deb http://mirror.aarnet.edu.au/debian unstable main contrib non-free and then did the following: # apt-get update Is it safe just to issue the following command? $ apt-get upgrade With all the transitions that are taking place right now in unstable, I would be very cautious in upgrading to unstable at this moment. However if you are brave enough then you can use the above command. It is safe in the sense that it will not remove any packages from your system and it will not mess up your configuration files etc., bye raju -- Kamaraju S Kusumanchi http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/kk288/ http://malayamaarutham.blogspot.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Upgrading from old Sarge (Testing) to Unstable
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 01:54:57PM +1100, Yasir Assam wrote: > Hello, > > I installed DVDs of Sarge when it was the testing distribution (before > the 3.1 release). [...] > I now have broadband and would like to upgrade to the Unstable dist. > What's the best way of doing this? I would recommend first upgrading to stable, then installing whatever specific packages from testing or unstable you find necessary. See apt_preferences(5) for a way to automate this. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Upgrading from old Sarge (Testing) to Unstable
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:54:57 +1100 Yasir Assam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > deb http://mirror.aarnet.edu.au/debian unstable main contrib non-free Assuming that's an official mirror. Easy to check. > Is it safe just to issue the following command? > > $ apt-get upgrade You probably want dist-upgrade rather than upgrade. As changing from stable to unstable is bound to require adding/removing packages. upgrade installed newer versions of installed packages as long as they don't require new packages installed. dist-upgrade installs the new packages too. > Previously, I compiled my own kernel (using the Debian kernal package > tools) and I also installed an ATI display driver separately. I also > made some changes to various configuration files. Will all that remain > intact if I upgrade? I don't think any configuration done by you should be lost. HTH -ol -- I will live forever, or die trying. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Upgrading from old Sarge (Testing) to Unstable
Hello, I installed DVDs of Sarge when it was the testing distribution (before the 3.1 release). Specifically I installed a snapshot dated 30 April 2005. When I installed it the following lines were added to /etc/apt/sources.list: deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux testing _Sarge_ - Official Snapshot i386 Binary-3 (20050430)]/ unstable contrib main deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux testing _Sarge_ - Official Snapshot i386 Binary-2 (20050430)]/ unstable contrib main deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux testing _Sarge_ - Official Snapshot i386 Binary-1 (20050430)]/ unstable contrib main I now have broadband and would like to upgrade to the Unstable dist. What's the best way of doing this? I added the following line to sources.list: deb http://mirror.aarnet.edu.au/debian unstable main contrib non-free and then did the following: # apt-get update Is it safe just to issue the following command? $ apt-get upgrade Previously, I compiled my own kernel (using the Debian kernal package tools) and I also installed an ATI display driver separately. I also made some changes to various configuration files. Will all that remain intact if I upgrade? I'm trying to avoid doing a complete reinstall. Incidentally, I tried updating a single package (emacs21) and got the following error: E: This installation run will require temporarily removing the essential package e2fsprogs due to a Conflicts/Pre-Depends loop. This is often bad, but if you really want to do it, activate the APT::Force-LoopBreak option. E: Internal Error, Could not early remove e2fsprogs I presume this is because I need to do an upgrade? Thanks, Yasir -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Smooth upgrade from testing to unstable
Chuck writes: > However, in changing "testing" to "unstable" throughout > /etc/apt/sources.list, one reference became broken. It is: > deb http://security.debian.org/ unstable/updates main As all developers are free to upload to Unstable at any time there is no need for 'unstable/updates'. -- John Hasler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Smooth upgrade from testing to unstable
Many thanks. On Tue, 24 May 2005, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: Quoting Charles Hallenbeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Hi list, Smooth as silk in under an hour, no known problems yet. However, in changing "testing" to "unstable" throughout /etc/apt/sources.list, one reference became broken. It is: deb http://security.debian.org/ unstable/updates main I commented this line out before doing apt-get dist-upgrade. But is there a better solution? Is there a proper link to use for "unstable"? http://www.debian.org/security/faq.en.html http://www.debian.org/releases/unstable/index.en.html "Please note that security updates for "unstable" distribution are not managed by the security team. Hence, "unstable" does not get security updates in a timely manner. For more information please see the Security Team's FAQ." -Roberto -- The Moon is Waning Gibbous (99% of Full) There are 10 kinds of people in the world: Those who count in binary, and those who do not. You can download some things from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Smooth upgrade from testing to unstable
Quoting Charles Hallenbeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Hi list, Smooth as silk in under an hour, no known problems yet. However, in changing "testing" to "unstable" throughout /etc/apt/sources.list, one reference became broken. It is: deb http://security.debian.org/ unstable/updates main I commented this line out before doing apt-get dist-upgrade. But is there a better solution? Is there a proper link to use for "unstable"? http://www.debian.org/security/faq.en.html http://www.debian.org/releases/unstable/index.en.html "Please note that security updates for "unstable" distribution are not managed by the security team. Hence, "unstable" does not get security updates in a timely manner. For more information please see the Security Team's FAQ." -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Smooth upgrade from testing to unstable
Hi list, Smooth as silk in under an hour, no known problems yet. However, in changing "testing" to "unstable" throughout /etc/apt/sources.list, one reference became broken. It is: deb http://security.debian.org/ unstable/updates main I commented this line out before doing apt-get dist-upgrade. But is there a better solution? Is there a proper link to use for "unstable"? Thanks much, Chuck -- The Moon is Waning Gibbous (99% of Full) There are 10 kinds of people in the world: Those who count in binary, and those who do not. You can download some things from http://www.mhcable.com/~chuckh -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Changing from testing to unstable.
just don't top post (for obvious reasons). keeping the context. Anyways, on this list, and most usenet groups, you Then you should know how to cut down the quoting. It's just a matter of John Summerfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Be lenient in what you accept. Some poor sod got a blast on a blind > list I was on for a time because he didn't top-post and he, the blind > bloke, didn't want to "read" all the other material before he got to > the point. -- John L. Fjellstad web: http://www.fjellstad.org/ Quis custodiet ipsos custodes -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Changing from testing to unstable.
Rob Weir wrote: > Adam Funk said > > If I have problems with a package from unstable and want to revert to a > > lower-numbered version, how would I do so? > > You can't, generally. Often you can downgrade individual packages by > dpkg -i'ing them from /var/cache/apt/archives/ or playing apt pinning > games, but don't depend on being able to go back. Agreed that going back is not to be counted on. But I wanted to say that I have used snapshot.debian.net effectively for that purpose. If you know what you are doing and can debug the problem to a version of a particular package then you can frequently find a previous working version of the package on snapshot.debian.net and then downgrade to it. With all of the caveats of downgrading. http://snapshot.debian.net I find snapshop to be very useful. Bob pgpxFqs9AGGNa.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Changing from testing to unstable.
--- John Summerfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bloody hell! > Dolphin:~# apt-get install apt-listbugs > Reading Package Lists... Done > Building Dependency Tree... Done > The following extra packages will be installed: > dpkg-ruby libdpkg-ruby1.8 libintl-gettext-ruby libintl-gettext-ruby1.8 > libzlib-ruby libzlib-ruby1.8 > The following NEW packages will be installed: > apt-listbugs dpkg-ruby libdpkg-ruby1.8 libintl-gettext-ruby > libintl-gettext-ruby1.8 libzlib-ruby libzlib-ruby1.8 > 0 upgraded, 7 newly installed, 0 to remove and 3 not upgraded. > Need to get 182kB of archives. > After unpacking 786kB of additional disk space will be used. > Do you want to continue? [Y/n] What you whinging about? :) It's ruby!! \o/ -- Thomas Adam = "The Linux Weekend Mechanic" -- http://linuxgazette.net "TAG Editor" -- http://linuxgazette.net " We'll just save up your sins, Thomas, and punish you for all of them at once when you get better. The experience will probably kill you. :)" -- Benjamin A. Okopnik (Linux Gazette Technical Editor) ___ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - so many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Changing from testing to unstable.
Sylvain Vedrenne wrote: Thomas Adam wrote: --- Adam Funk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: To change from testing to unstable, is is as simple as s/testing/unstable in /etc/apt/sources.list, `apt-get update` and `apt-get upgrade` (or do I need to use dist-upgrade for this)? Basically, yes. "dist-upgrade" implies "upgrade", but more importantly a dist-upgrade installs dependant packages external to those not already installed, which an upgrade does not (see the manpage for apt-get). If I have problems with a package from unstable and want to revert to a lower-numbered version, how would I do so? In the first place, the package 'apt-listbugs' can help you avoid some critical bugs (those that are already known at the time you apt-get install ). Bloody hell! Dolphin:~# apt-get install apt-listbugs Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done The following extra packages will be installed: dpkg-ruby libdpkg-ruby1.8 libintl-gettext-ruby libintl-gettext-ruby1.8 libzlib-ruby libzlib-ruby1.8 The following NEW packages will be installed: apt-listbugs dpkg-ruby libdpkg-ruby1.8 libintl-gettext-ruby libintl-gettext-ruby1.8 libzlib-ruby libzlib-ruby1.8 0 upgraded, 7 newly installed, 0 to remove and 3 not upgraded. Need to get 182kB of archives. After unpacking 786kB of additional disk space will be used. Do you want to continue? [Y/n] -- Cheers John -- spambait [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Changing from testing to unstable.
Be lenient in what you accept. Some poor sod got a blast on a blind list I was on for a time because he didn't top-post and he, the blind bloke, didn't want to "read" all the other material before he got to the point. OTOH someone else on that list told the blind bloke how to get past it. Me, I'm happy with a kind, thoughtful reponse given in good humour. Preferable, (he says having just corrected one) free of speling eros. Florian Ernst wrote: Hello! Please don't top-post, it kills the reading flow. True, many MUAs set the cursor to the top of the message being edited, but that's just so the user can weed out unneeded lines starting from top. On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 06:12:05PM +0100, Ricky Clarkson wrote: -- Cheers John -- spambait [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Changing from testing to unstable.
Hello! Please don't top-post, it kills the reading flow. True, many MUAs set the cursor to the top of the message being edited, but that's just so the user can weed out unneeded lines starting from top. On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 06:12:05PM +0100, Ricky Clarkson wrote: > On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 18:41:19 +0200, Florian Ernst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [... apt-get install ...] > > No. The former ($package/$flavor) just pulls $thepackage from $flavor > > but pulls its dependencies from the default release one has set up, > > the latter (-t $flavor $package) pulls everything ($package + deps) > > from $flavor. > > Is that true in the case of experimental? I had a few problems with > experimental that I thought were related to this, a while back. Using "-t" just pins the given $flavor to 990, so unless some other pinning has been applied this will install packages from the given $flavor. BTW quoting the Debian FAQ: "project/experimental/: This directory contains packages and tools which are still being developed, and are still in the alpha testing stage. Users shouldn't be using packages from here, because they can be dangerous and harmful even for the most experienced people." So expect things to go seriously wrong there... ;) Cheers, Flo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Changing from testing to unstable.
Is that true in the case of experimental? I had a few problems with experimental that I thought were related to this, a while back. On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 18:41:19 +0200, Florian Ernst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello! > > On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 04:34:31PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: > > --- Ricky Clarkson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:07:10 +0100 (BST), Thomas Adam > > > If you have appropriate source lines you can do apt-get install > > > thepackage/testing or apt-get install thepackage/stable > > > > (synonymous with: apt-get -t install > > No. The former ($package/$flavor) just pulls $thepackage from $flavor > but pulls its dependencies from the default release one has set up, > the latter (-t $flavor $package) pulls everything ($package + deps) > from $flavor. > > Cheers, > Flo > > > > signature.asc - 1K > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Changing from testing to unstable.
Hello! On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 04:34:31PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: > --- Ricky Clarkson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:07:10 +0100 (BST), Thomas Adam > > If you have appropriate source lines you can do apt-get install > > thepackage/testing or apt-get install thepackage/stable > > (synonymous with: apt-get -t install No. The former ($package/$flavor) just pulls $thepackage from $flavor but pulls its dependencies from the default release one has set up, the latter (-t $flavor $package) pulls everything ($package + deps) from $flavor. Cheers, Flo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Changing from testing to unstable.
--- Ricky Clarkson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:07:10 +0100 (BST), Thomas Adam > > Generally you don't -- you wait for the bug to be fixed. > > If you have appropriate source lines you can do apt-get install > thepackage/testing or apt-get install thepackage/stable (synonymous with: apt-get -t install > You might also want to get a particular package from > archive.debian.org and use dpkg -i thepackage.deb if the testing or > stable packages are too old for you. Of course if this route is chosen, you *must* ensure that you put the installed package on hold. -- Thomas Adam = "The Linux Weekend Mechanic" -- http://linuxgazette.net "TAG Editor" -- http://linuxgazette.net " We'll just save up your sins, Thomas, and punish you for all of them at once when you get better. The experience will probably kill you. :)" -- Benjamin A. Okopnik (Linux Gazette Technical Editor) ___ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - so many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Changing from testing to unstable.
Thomas Adam wrote: --- Adam Funk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: To change from testing to unstable, is is as simple as s/testing/unstable in /etc/apt/sources.list, `apt-get update` and `apt-get upgrade` (or do I need to use dist-upgrade for this)? Basically, yes. "dist-upgrade" implies "upgrade", but more importantly a dist-upgrade installs dependant packages external to those not already installed, which an upgrade does not (see the manpage for apt-get). If I have problems with a package from unstable and want to revert to a lower-numbered version, how would I do so? In the first place, the package 'apt-listbugs' can help you avoid some critical bugs (those that are already known at the time you apt-get install ). http://packages.debian.org/unstable/admin/apt-listbugs http://packages.debian.org/testing/admin/apt-listbugs Cheers, Sylvain. Generally you don't -- you wait for the bug to be fixed. -- Thomas Adam = "The Linux Weekend Mechanic" -- http://linuxgazette.net "TAG Editor" -- http://linuxgazette.net " We'll just save up your sins, Thomas, and punish you for all of them at once when you get better. The experience will probably kill you. :)" -- Benjamin A. Okopnik (Linux Gazette Technical Editor) -- ___ Sylvain Vedrenne Alten Technologies - www.alten.fr Oce Print Logic Technologies 1, rue Jean Lemoinephoneto: +33 (0)1 48 98 81 01 94015 Creteil Cedex, France mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Changing from testing to unstable.
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:07:10 +0100 (BST), Thomas Adam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > To change from testing to unstable, is is as simple as > > s/testing/unstable in /etc/apt/sources.list, `apt-get update` and > > `apt-get upgrade` (or do I need to use dist-upgrade for this)? > > Basically, yes. dist-upgrade is the one you want. > > If I have problems with a package from unstable and want to revert to a > > lower-numbered version, how would I do so? > > Generally you don't -- you wait for the bug to be fixed. If you have appropriate source lines you can do apt-get install thepackage/testing or apt-get install thepackage/stable You might also want to get a particular package from archive.debian.org and use dpkg -i thepackage.deb if the testing or stable packages are too old for you. > -- Thomas Adam ^^ Bladdy Saverner -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Changing from testing to unstable.
On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 01:45:56PM +, Adam Funk said > To change from testing to unstable, is is as simple as > s/testing/unstable in /etc/apt/sources.list, `apt-get update` and > `apt-get upgrade` (or do I need to use dist-upgrade for this)? Yes, use dist-upgrade. > If I have problems with a package from unstable and want to revert to a > lower-numbered version, how would I do so? You can't, generally. Often you can downgrade individual packages by dpkg -i'ing them from /var/cache/apt/archives/ or playing apt pinning games, but don't depend on being able to go back. -- Words of the day: Australia Marxist JUWTF advisors interception explosion SHA signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Changing from testing to unstable.
--- Adam Funk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > To change from testing to unstable, is is as simple as > s/testing/unstable in /etc/apt/sources.list, `apt-get update` and > `apt-get upgrade` (or do I need to use dist-upgrade for this)? Basically, yes. "dist-upgrade" implies "upgrade", but more importantly a dist-upgrade installs dependant packages external to those not already installed, which an upgrade does not (see the manpage for apt-get). > If I have problems with a package from unstable and want to revert to a > lower-numbered version, how would I do so? Generally you don't -- you wait for the bug to be fixed. -- Thomas Adam = "The Linux Weekend Mechanic" -- http://linuxgazette.net "TAG Editor" -- http://linuxgazette.net " We'll just save up your sins, Thomas, and punish you for all of them at once when you get better. The experience will probably kill you. :)" -- Benjamin A. Okopnik (Linux Gazette Technical Editor) ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - so many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changing from testing to unstable.
To change from testing to unstable, is is as simple as s/testing/unstable in /etc/apt/sources.list, `apt-get update` and `apt-get upgrade` (or do I need to use dist-upgrade for this)? If I have problems with a package from unstable and want to revert to a lower-numbered version, how would I do so? Thanks, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: upgrade from testing to unstable
Hi Bernd . On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 06:33:46PM +0100, Bernd Kappler wrote: [Upgrading from woody to sid] >Unpacking replacement console-data ... >Setting up console-common (0.7.12) ... >Looking for keymap to install: >NONE >Setting up console-data (1999.08.29-23) ... >No default for console-data/keymap/qwerty/macedonian/standard/keymap - >picking oneNo default for >console-data/keymap/qwerty/latvian/standard/keymap - picking one >No default for console-data/keymap/qwerty/ukrainian/standard/keymap - >picking one >No default for console-data/keymap/qwerty/lithuanian/standard/keymap - >picking oneNo default for >console-data/keymap/qwerty/russian/standard/keymap - picking one >No default for console-data/keymap/qwerty/canadian/variant - picking one > >Can't call method "choices" on an undefined value at >/usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Question.pm line 77, line 276. >Use of uninitialized value in scalar chomp at >/usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Client/ConfModule.pm line 124, line >275. >Use of uninitialized value in split at >/usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Client/ConfModule.pm line 125, line >275. >Use of uninitialized value in split at >/var/lib/dpkg/info/console-data.config line 816, line 275. >dpkg: error processing console-data (--configure): > subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 29 >Errors were encountered while processing: > console-data >E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) I don't know, what's wrong either, :( I filed a bugreport to console-data. The only thing, what helped was: save the /var/cache/debonf/config.dat to config.dat.bak (or so) delete all console-* entries in config.dat try dpkg --configure -a Worked for me on PPC and Sparc Best regards Jan -- One time, you all will be emulated by linux! Jan- Hendrik Palic Url:"http://www.billgotchy.de"; E-Mail: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.12 GCS d- s: a-- C++ UL++ P+++ L+++ E W++ N+ o+ K- w--- O- M- V- PS++ PE Y+ PGP++ t--- 5- X+++ R-- tv- b++ DI-- D+++ G+++ e+++ h+ r++ z+ --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- pgppXtt2qCjdh.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Testing to unstable
Thus spake Jason M. Harvey: > | without any problems. I might try compiling a non-debian 2.4 to see how it > | goes. (I can still boot the system with my old 2.2 kernel) > | > | The way the error messages referes to device 303, does 2.4 refer to devices > | differently? > | > > as for the device 303 error, That's probably 3:03, which should be /dev/hdc or /dev/hda3, I can't remember which right now - presumably the one mentioned in lilo.conf. Steve pgpdzYb5vztEt.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Testing to unstable
| without any problems. I might try compiling a non-debian 2.4 to see how it | goes. (I can still boot the system with my old 2.2 kernel) | | The way the error messages referes to device 303, does 2.4 refer to devices | differently? | as for the device 303 error, i've never ran into that myself. the only other info i can think of that _may_ help: i've compile 2.4.2 myself then used apt-get to install a kernel image of 2.4.14-k6... so, i went with the "basic" .config, which i knew worked for me (tested it before). what i thought was interesting: i'm using ext2... on the kernel-image i installed via apt, the kernel drivers for ext2 were compiled as modules, not built into the kernel itself. any change your problem could be related to modutils? just a thought... i'm sure re-compiling may solve that... -- registered linux user #202942 http://counter.li.org/ http://www.theigloo.dhs.org
Re: Testing to unstable
From: "Jason M. Harvey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Testing to unstable Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 13:55:51 -0500 On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 07:19:15AM -0600, Adam Majer wrote: | On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 07:10:32AM -0500, Roderick Cummings wrote: <<---snip--->> | > Please append a correct "root=" boot option <<---snip--->> is there any change there's no root=/dev/device_name for your root partition in your lilo.conf? for example, mine is root=/dev/hda2 while my boot=/dev/hda, and my fstab has /dev/hda2 / ext2 defaults 0 1. good luck, jason -- registered linux user #202942 http://counter.li.org/ http://www.theigloo.dhs.org Mine is /dev/hda3, which is in lilo.conf, and my fstab file is correct too. Previously I've compiled my own 2.2 kernels, manually and the debian way without any problems. I might try compiling a non-debian 2.4 to see how it goes. (I can still boot the system with my old 2.2 kernel) The way the error messages referes to device 303, does 2.4 refer to devices differently? _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
Re: Testing to unstable
From: Adam Majer To: Roderick Cummings CC: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Testing to unstable Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 07:19:15 -0600 On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 07:10:32AM -0500, Roderick Cummings wrote: > > Hi, > > I had a system running testing for a while, and I decided to try unstable. > I did a dist-upgrade and everything seemed to go fine, however on reboot, > the new 2.4 kernel won't boot correctly, it fails to mount root. I've tried > a few things with mkinitrd, and fiddled with lilo. Modutils were upgraded > with everything else, I thought to run a 2.4 kernel, the only gotcha was to > make sure you upgrade modutils as well. > > Here is the exact text: > > request_module[block-major-3]: Root fs not mounted > VFS: Cannot open root device "303" or 03:03 > Please append a correct "root=" boot option > Kernenl Panic: VFS Unable to mount root fs on 03:03 How did you install the kernel? Manually or using Debian kernel package thingy? I always install it manually and never had this problem so I'm assuming it has to be Debian kernel package thingy that's at fault?? Not sure though. I installed the 2.4.17-1 kernel .deb for i686 that is in testing. _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Re: Testing to unstable
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 07:19:15AM -0600, Adam Majer wrote: | On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 07:10:32AM -0500, Roderick Cummings wrote: <<---snip--->> | > Please append a correct "root=" boot option <<---snip--->> is there any change there's no root=/dev/device_name for your root partition in your lilo.conf? for example, mine is root=/dev/hda2 while my boot=/dev/hda, and my fstab has /dev/hda2 / ext2 defaults 0 1. good luck, jason -- registered linux user #202942 http://counter.li.org/ http://www.theigloo.dhs.org
Re: Testing to unstable
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 07:10:32AM -0500, Roderick Cummings wrote: > > Hi, > > I had a system running testing for a while, and I decided to try unstable. > I did a dist-upgrade and everything seemed to go fine, however on reboot, > the new 2.4 kernel won't boot correctly, it fails to mount root. I've tried > a few things with mkinitrd, and fiddled with lilo. Modutils were upgraded > with everything else, I thought to run a 2.4 kernel, the only gotcha was to > make sure you upgrade modutils as well. > > Here is the exact text: > > request_module[block-major-3]: Root fs not mounted > VFS: Cannot open root device "303" or 03:03 > Please append a correct "root=" boot option > Kernenl Panic: VFS Unable to mount root fs on 03:03 How did you install the kernel? Manually or using Debian kernel package thingy? I always install it manually and never had this problem so I'm assuming it has to be Debian kernel package thingy that's at fault?? Not sure though.
Testing to unstable
Hi, I had a system running testing for a while, and I decided to try unstable. I did a dist-upgrade and everything seemed to go fine, however on reboot, the new 2.4 kernel won't boot correctly, it fails to mount root. I've tried a few things with mkinitrd, and fiddled with lilo. Modutils were upgraded with everything else, I thought to run a 2.4 kernel, the only gotcha was to make sure you upgrade modutils as well. Here is the exact text: request_module[block-major-3]: Root fs not mounted VFS: Cannot open root device "303" or 03:03 Please append a correct "root=" boot option Kernenl Panic: VFS Unable to mount root fs on 03:03 Thanks. _ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
upgrade from testing to unstable
Hi, I just upgraded my system from testing to unstable. However, the configurarion of console-data can not be accomplished. The error message generated by dpkg --cofigure reads Unpacking replacement console-data ... Setting up console-common (0.7.12) ... Looking for keymap to install: NONE Setting up console-data (1999.08.29-23) ... No default for console-data/keymap/qwerty/macedonian/standard/keymap - picking oneNo default for console-data/keymap/qwerty/latvian/standard/keymap - picking one No default for console-data/keymap/qwerty/ukrainian/standard/keymap - picking one No default for console-data/keymap/qwerty/lithuanian/standard/keymap - picking oneNo default for console-data/keymap/qwerty/russian/standard/keymap - picking one No default for console-data/keymap/qwerty/canadian/variant - picking one Can't call method "choices" on an undefined value at /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Question.pm line 77, line 276. Use of uninitialized value in scalar chomp at /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Client/ConfModule.pm line 124, line 275. Use of uninitialized value in split at /usr/share/perl5/Debconf/Client/ConfModule.pm line 125, line 275. Use of uninitialized value in split at /var/lib/dpkg/info/console-data.config line 816, line 275. dpkg: error processing console-data (--configure): subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 29 Errors were encountered while processing: console-data E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) Does anybody know what is going wrong? Thanks Bernd -- _ Bernd Kappler Universität Freiburg Freiburger Materialforschungszentrum Stefan-Meier-Straße 21 79104 Freiburg Tel.: +49-761-203-4757 Fax: +49 761 203-4709 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
