Re: Testing system upgrade from sarge to etch
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 10:02:06PM +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> I wrote a little script (attached) that creates a sarge chroot, installs
> all packages of standard or higher priority, and then upgrades the whole
> thing to etch.
> I've just ran it, and with the exception of lpr, there were no problems.
> lpr does cause a problem, but it seems to be because the chroot does not
> contain /proc and the preinst that runs on upgrade calls
> start-stop-daemon, which fails due to the lack of /proc. So, in the real
> world, I don't think there's a problem.
> I attempted to install all optional packages from sarge and do the test
> with them, but that failed: it seems not all optional packages in sarge
> are co-installable.
What are the blacklisted packages, and why? What "optional" sarge
packages aren't co-installable? Policy  isn't crystal clear on
this, but it would seem that this should be possible (right?)
| (In a sense everything that isn't required is optional, but that's
| not what is meant here.) This is all the software that you might
| reasonably want to install if you didn't know what it was and
| don't have specialized requirements. This is a much larger system
| and includes the X Window System, a full TeX distribution, and
| many applications. Note that optional packages should not conflict
| with each other.
Actually, this makes me think that the dh_make templates should
default to "extra", lest someone actually try to install the maximal
number of packages :)