Re: Upgrading slink -> potato
On Thu 12 Aug 1999, Christopher C Chimelis wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Aug 1999, Paul Slootman wrote:
>
> > OK, I finally got round to trying the dreaded upgrade :-)
> > After manually upgrading libc6.1 and a couple of related things,
> > I let "apt-get upgrade" do its thing. I repeated a couple of times
> > (I have no idea why it kept stuff back; after "apt-get install
> > random-package" from the list of kept-back stuff it went on and
> > installed a couple of others, etc. I then tries "apt-get dist-upgrade"
> > which went a lot further.
I forgot to mention that a couple of times, random processes crashed
during package installations (e.g. gzip segfaulting). Redoing that
package then worked just fine. This is the same thing I noticed when
installing the AS1000A 5/333 some time ago; I blamed it on flaky memory
then, but now I think that maybe the installation kernels for slink were
compiled with a buggy compiler? I *know* my hardware is stable, as it
was running 2.0.37-pre-something for 70 days before I rebooted (compiled
with egcs 1.03's cc1, no alpha patches in the kernel whatsoever).
Maybe something went wrong during the installation which caused the
problems I had...
> Glad to hear that it went relatively smoothly. From what I hear, even
> i386 upgrades are ugly still.
Well, I didn't have any problems when I updated a test i386 box from slink
to unstable a month ago...
> > (BTW, wwwoffle has a hardcoded dependency on libc6 :-( )
>
> I'll take care of this tonight or tomorrow.
I had started to do this, but then noticed that when I did "debchange
-n", the date was Jan 4, 1970" ... Which triggered this thread ;-)
> > I don't dare to run the updated stuff for the time being; can e.g. Chris
> > or Bart shed some light on this? Is perhaps a 2.2 kernel mandatory?
>
> Definitely go to a 2.2 kernel. If it isn't a requirement, it should be.
> I just booted with 2.2.11 and all seems well. If it gets hosed for you,
> boot with 2.2.7 or 2.2.5 (2.2.8-2.2.10 had problems including file system
> corruption and spontaneous thread death).
Shhh. Don't tell my box at work:
$ uname -r
2.2.9-ac3
$ uptime
2:20pm up 66 days, 1:38, 3 users, load average: 1.00, 1.00, 1.00
In case you're wondering about the load:
$ ps aux | grep seti
paul 29091 99.9 21.5 14504 13652 ? R N Jun 23 69767:44 ./setiathome -email
Anyway, I'll give 2.2.11 a try; with my floppy patch, sent to Alan Cox
today, it got into 2.0.37 but not into 2.2.x last time. I also sent it
to Linus for 2.3.x.
Paul Slootman
--
home: paul@wurtel.demon.nl http://www.wurtel.demon.nl/
debian: paul@debian.org isdn4linux: paul@isdn4linux.de
work: paul@murphy.nl Murphy Software, Enschede, NL
Reply to: