addendum, I think this one is sorted, so marked *solved i guess :)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"qubes-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to qubes-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
so I followed the "DETAILED" version to upgrade from F23-> F24 , even
changing all my AppVMs to use the new F24 only to discover, that the
Template didn't upgrade.
So:
I see no point in deleting the template and doing the same thing again,
as there were no errors in the process.
Can
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 2017-05-23 00:01, yreb-qusw wrote:
> On 05/22/2017 05:56 PM, Andrew David Wong wrote:
>> You might want to check that it's really a Fedora 24 template
>> (and not still Fedora 23).
>
> sorry Andrew, I'm no clue-by, you know, unless it's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 2017-05-22 19:47, fooyreb wrote:
> well the mac complaint just auto disappeared, however now in a terminal
> in fedora 24 template , I am getting references to fedora 23 , is this
> correct ?
>
> Or do I need to do whatever the version for
Andrew David Wong:
> On 2017-05-21 23:47, fooyreb wrote:
>> Andrew David Wong:
>>> We strongly recommend that you upgrade from EOL versions in
>>> TemplateVMs. (This is not necessary in dom0.)
>>>
>>> Fedora 23 is EOL. Therefore, we recommend upgrading to Fedora
>>> 24.
>
>> Andrew, thx for the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 2017-05-21 23:47, fooyreb wrote:
> Andrew David Wong:
>> We strongly recommend that you upgrade from EOL versions in
>> TemplateVMs. (This is not necessary in dom0.)
>>
>> Fedora 23 is EOL. Therefore, we recommend upgrading to Fedora
>> 24.
>
Andrew David Wong:
> We strongly recommend that you upgrade from EOL versions in
> TemplateVMs. (This is not necessary in dom0.)
>
> Fedora 23 is EOL. Therefore, we recommend upgrading to Fedora 24.
Andrew,
thx for the reply
1) I'm sorry, I don't see what you mean by "not necessary in dom0"
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 2017-05-21 19:41, fooyreb wrote:
> Debian 9 and Fedora 24 Should I be upgrading to these?
>
> is it recommended that people do this? Or is there some other
> dist-upgrade that is supposed to happen at some point ?
>
We strongly recommend
