Re: strangest things after upgrade from 8 to 9
On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 02:40:41PM -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On the other hand, I have done in-place upgrades of Debian on every
> occasion
Ditto. Worked better than they tell on this list to the newcomers.
This particular installation I'm writing from began its life as etch
back before it was testing.
> save one: when I moved my main personal file server from 32-bit
> to 64-bit after a hardware swap.
Did that one too.
> Debian's upgrade process is rather robust. So much so, that people
> complaining to Red Hat that Debian managed to provide robust in-place
> upgrades since forever
For the sake of the completeness, Red Hat provides a way. It involves
booting from an install CD/DVD with an "upgrade" option. It's
unsupported though.
I did it multiple times, end result can be described as 'salvageable'.
> while people paying $$$ for RHEL support
> contracts were always told, "wipe and reinstall" was at least part of
> what moved Red Hat to start providing support for in-place upgrades (at
> least as of RHEL7, if I understand correctly).
Please do not blame support for that.
Those poor (literally) overseas guys and gals have two options then it
comes to such things.
Option A - do it official Red Hat way (i.e. - reinstall).
Option B - suggest a customer to do an unsupported upgrade, and get
blamed/fired for all kinds of inevitable trouble afterwards.
> The problem that people tend to encounter is when they either don't read
> and follow the instructions in the release notes for the new release or
> have packages installed from low quality third party sources.
Or, in this particular case, follow "good old"
configure-make-make_install pattern.
> There have been some problematic transitions (e.g., the one involving
> udev was a good example)
That's a *very* x86-centric POV.
For instance, whoever came up with the idea of disabling
CONFIG_COMPACTION on armel/kirkwood between jessie and stretch rendered
armel ununsable on stretch.
And let's do not mention kfreebsd.
Reco
Reply to: