[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#416303: upgrade-reports: upgrade report: success on a simple mail/web server



On Monday 26 March 2007 20:00, Jochen Voss wrote:
> as requested by Frans Pop on dda, here is a Sarge->Etch upgrade
> report.  Everything worked ok, details are below.

First of all, thanks!

> Minor glitches
> --------------
> 1) The comment for "aptitude upgrade" mentions that this should lead
>    to glibc being upgraded early.  This did not happen for me.  It was
>    listed in the "The following packages have been kept back" section
>    and only was only upgraded when I did "aptitude install
>    initrd-tools" in the next step.

No, it says "advantage of doing the _next_ step early" would result in 
glibc being upgraded early. I understand your confusion though.

> 2) when I reached the "aptitude purge kernel-image-2.6-<flavour>"
>    step, I got a scary error message

That must mean that either kernel-image-2.6.8-3-686 did not get unmarked 
as auto installed in the first step, or that you accidentally gave the 
command to remove the real kernel image package instead of the pseudo 
image package.

>    Probably the release notes should contain some encouragement for
>    users who reach this point.  I decided to reboot before removing
>    the kernel.

This step is intended to only remove an unused and obsolete meta package, 
not a real kernel image package.

> 3) The "various cleanup" section on the wiki page lists the point
>    "remove gcc-3.3, g++-3.3 ...".  This happened automatically for me
>    during "aptitude dist-upgrade" ("The following packages are unused
>    and will be REMOVED").

In my own tests some packages are removed automatically, but not all.

> 4) During install the symbolic link
>    "/etc/apache2/sites-enabled/000-default" appeared.  This broke my
>    common web server setup, because it slipped in between my own
>    "0-redir" and the virtual host definitions.  Simply removing the
>    link fixed the web server.

You may want to add that info to #415775. It looks like a different 
manifestation of the same bug: the configuration scripts not recognizing 
this is an upgrade instead of a new installation.

> 5) The new dovecot config file looks very different from the old one
[...]
> 6) Exim also neede a bit of fiddling, but since I had manually
>    custimised the setup before this seems ok to me.

These look like regular stuff you can expect during an upgrade.

Cheers,
FJP

Attachment: pgpQU8CNYCAxG.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: