Re: Upgrade docs and Release Notes (was Re: Starting second test cycle)
On Fri, Jun 02, 2000 at 12:07:58AM +0200, J.A. Bezemer wrote:
>
> On Thu, 1 Jun 2000, Ben Collins wrote:
>
> > >
> > > BTW, it just crossed my mind that a potato/sparc-compiled static apt might
> > > just work perfectly ONCE you have a 2.2.x kernel. Procedures would then become
> > > very easy:
> >
> > Yes, but not everyone reads the docs on upgrades.
>
> Indeed. However, in this case the problem is likely to solve itself, since
> no-one will even know about the static apt/dpkg _unless_ they read the docs.
> And a DO_NOT_INSTALL_THESE.txt along with the .debs should do the rest.
> Debian sysadmins usually are not _that_ stupid ;-)
Heh, you're very trusting of people's ability to read an entire document.
> > > - compile & install 2.2.x kernel
> >
> > "install the kernel deb from potato"
>
> (unless you need some special options ;-)
The sparc kernels have all the standard options compiled in.
> > > - install static apt/dpkg if using CDs
> > > - <see other arches>
> >
> > "see general upgrade procedure"
> >
> > > Will this work? Why not? (Apart from the fact that the preinst of dpkg/apt
> > > don't check for a 2.2.x kernel (which, if needed, should be solvable easily))
> >
> > That's the kicker, and it is not so easily solvable without copying over
> > the ugly hacks I have in libc6's preinst. Which I would not even want in
> > either of these packages.
>
> Are they really so ugly? (if uname -r != 2.2.* then "exit -1"? or something
> with /proc/version?) And anyway, these are only non-mainstream temporary pkgs
> (i.e. no need to get these hacks in the "regular" apt/dpkg source; the
> "staticness" hacks aren't either). I don't see a big problem.
Ok, so we distribute binaries without source on our official CD's!? Come
on, this is absurd.
> > > Also to Josip: I know you can upgrade by mounting each CD consequtively etc.
> > > That's the way 2.0->2.1 was done. You can also upgrade by
> > > dpkg -i /cdrom/dists/potato/main/binary-i386/xxx/yyy.deb for each and every
> > > package, which is just slightly more horrible.
> >
> > No, you could simply do apt-cdrom on the first CD *only*, then
> >
> > "apt-get install apt dpkg"
> >
> > This would get you that far, and then you would have the new packages,
> > wihtout a lot of fuss, and run apt-cdrom on the other 2 cdrom's, and run
> > "apt-get dist-upgrade".
>
> Yeah, I've thought of that, too. Only it doesn't work on anything < 2.1r4
> (2.1r0's apt doesn't have apt-cdrom), so you'd have to fetch & (manually!)
> install "half-new" slink versions first anyway. Also apt 0.3.19 fixes a random
> (timing-related) deadlock thing in the CD handling, so if you're out of luck,
> "apt-get install" from CDs "won't work as expected". (Never happened to me,
> but I've seen several reports.)
For sparc that is fine. I'm willing to tell people to make sure they have
the latest slink apt/dpkg before proceeding and use this method than to
compile a static apt/dpkg and hack together some preinst checks. As for
the apt problem, it is _only_ eveident when some odd sequence of
_multiple_ CD's are involved in upgrades. This wont happen if you only do
apt-cdrom on CD #1, and only install apt and dpkg. I know, I've tested
this much before.
Ben
--
-----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
/ Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \
` bcollins@debian.org -- bcollins@openldap.org -- bcollins@linux.com '
`---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
Reply to: