Re: Bug#418688: d-i: Points to "Sarge" in sources.list
Just a comment on this.
Why the installer does not has only the version-codename in the
sources.list?
or both (stable and etch).
there are 2 issues here:
1 . the users want to have a controled upgrade to a new release. So
having etch as release-name in sources.list makes it to switch to
oldstable, instead of stable.
2 . the users want to upgrade to a new stable when a new release comes
out.
even if the package manager shows a new bunch of updates, automatically
updated systems can automatically be broken if stable is defined, by a
bad upgrade.
Normally, some systems are installed prior to the release (for example
systems installed since november are etch (testing) ... no point
installing sarge just to upgrade a few months later) use dist-upgrade
for it's upgrade, or even systems using backports.org reference.
So, i believe the simpliest is to ask the user if he wants to upgrade
directly when a new release comes out, or to stick with the current
stable.
Another example are people that are in the middle of some kind of
development in sarge and sudnly all system changes.
it's something to check ... or not, just a thought.
Qua, 2007-04-11 às 12:25 +0200, Frans Pop escreveu:
> reassign 418688 mirrors
> thanks
>
> On Wednesday 11 April 2007 11:35, Frederic & Leah wrote:
> > On a brand new minimal install of Etch from CD1, sources.list
> > reference the Etch CD but Sarge online repositories (both
> > mirrorservice.org and security.debian.org)
>
> This means that mirrorservice.org has not yet switched "stable" to "etch";
> they're just not up-to-date. The wrong listing for security is a side
> effect of that. We will try to avoid this issue for future releases in
> the installer though.
>
> I'm reassigning this to the mirrors team. You can just change the entries
> in your sources list manually, but should probably consider changing to a
> mirror that has the etch release.
> You can check http://<mirror>/debian/dists/etch/Release: it should have a
> line "Suite: stable".
>
> Cheers,
> FJP
>
>
Reply to: