Re: upgrading to unstable
On 19 May 05 15:04:10 GMT, Alberto Bert <bert@isiosf.isi.it> wrote:
> after reading the FAQ at:
>
> http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/kk288/debian_choosing_distribution.html
>
> I'm upgrading from sarge to unstable...
After reading this I'm not convinced to do the same. The main argument
for preferring unstable over testing appears to be that when testing
breaks, it can take longer to fix than unstable. While this is true,
it's not a showstopper because you can always install the fixed
packages from unstable and wait for testing to catch up.
Testing is almost-but-not-quite bleeding-edge and that's good enough
for me.
> I'm pretty scared, so it would be nice to have some help from the
> list...
If you are scared, then don't do it...
> In doing it I'm using aptitude. I just saied it to U all the Upgrade
> packages, then I'm upgrading (it's downloading...)
... but it's a bit late now ;-)
> Is there anything else I should do?
Give yourself plenty of time to sort out any issues that crop up
unexpectedly. I doubt you will have many, the difference between
testing and unstable really isn't that great.
The real challenge is upgrading stable to testing/unstable. I've done
this a few times now and I always do it in stages, especially on
servers. First upgrade the tools used to perform the upgrade, ie -
apt-* and dpkg. Then upgrade each major service (web server,
mail-transport-agent, etc) individually. Don't forget the kernel; going
from 2.4.* to 2.6.* has some major implications especially for a
desktop. Once everything important is working properly, do a final
dist-upgrade to finish the job.
*Always* pay special attention to the feedback from the package
management system. It's a good idea to run (the equivalent of)
'apt-get -us dist-upgrade' before each major step just to see what it
proposes to do next.
--
Frank Copeland
Home Page: <URL:http://thingy.apana.org.au/~fjc/>
Not the Scientology Home Page: <URL:http://xenu.apana.org.au/ntshp/>
Reply to: