Thanks for the ideas Franz > > I would prefer "if ! dpkg -l aptitude | grep -q ^ii ; then" to check if > aptitude is installed. applied > In the steps to perform after the checks there is: > 2. aptitude -f --with-suggests --with-recommends dist-upgrade > There have been discussions [1,2] before that aptitude should _not_ be run > with "--with-suggests", although this has not yet been corrected in the > release notes. > Note that the "--with-suggests" option has been removed in the Sarge > version of aptitude. applied. It was rather confusing to have this argument work, and then not work in the "upgraded" version so I've dropped it. > Also, it is currently not entirely clear whether the package tools > (aptitude, dpkg) should or should not be upgraded to their Sarge versions > before upgrading the rest of the packages. I've not done anything with this. If the recommendations in the doco change, I'm happy to modify the script. I tried the original on a woody box I hadn't used in a while, and tweaked a few things based on the experience. The good news is that the upgrade was pretty smooth, in spite of me running out of space in /usr. I would like to add some checking of that, e.g. warn if /usr has less than 10% free. Any suggestions for a heuristic? The main problem, of course, is that I had to s/stable/testing/g in my sources.list because sarge has not yet been marked stable. I'm sure the "user view" of the release process could be explained better. Maybe I just haven't seen the relevant document. But as I understand it - if I have a box with only 'stable' deb lines in sources.list, and a few days after release I 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade' I will get all sorts of packages shown as ready to be upgraded but blocked because e.g. libc6 needs upgrading. Could someone point me to where this is documented/being discussed? Cheers Vince
Attachment:
upgrade-prep.sh
Description: Bourne shell script