Re: Testing upgrade and consequences
On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 09:19:34AM +0000 , Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> I've had to suffer this one - providing telephone support and advice over
> a week plus to an old and valued friend :) [Hi Martin :) ]
>
> He is a web developer and electronic publisher with several mailing lists on
> his main site. He is also a trainer on Linux subjects and Apache, has run
> Debian for several years and is technically extremely competent. He upgraded
> from a Potato 2.2r2 system to current "testing" and most things broke in serious
> ways, such that he swears he will never again move from stable releases.
>
> Mailman configuration broke - it took him several days to fix the configuration
> files for several lists.
>
> Pine broke and is apparently unfixable. Mutt works, but is not his preferred
who cares :)
> option.
>
> Exim configuration didn't, such that he reverted to smail. He won't believe me
> when I say that Exim works fine.
he? exim is the same in testing as is in potato
> Most seriously of all - "Apache in Debian is seriously broken"
also. it's the same version as is in potato
> There may be a dependency loop on apache-perl which is inappropriate.
>
> The default configuration of apache has changed drastically between Potato
> and testing. The version in testing is locked down solidly - everything is
not true. just look at the versions in potato and testing 1.3.9-13.1 both
> denied unless explicitly allowed with apache directives. This is at odds with
like what?
> the behaviour up to and including potato, which was open. Apache stomped over
> his httpd.conf files on upgrade and left him wondering what _exactly_ had
> happened. As he says "All other distributions work out of the box. When I'm
by default nothing should change, iff you don't confirm it
Petr Cech
--
Debian GNU/Linux maintainer - www.debian.{org,cz}
cech@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz
<Myth> thats \\GNU\Linux$ to you
Reply to: