Re: How i do upgrade my operating system to Debian “buster”?
On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 13:46:53 +0000
"Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 05:27:26AM -0800, Weaver wrote:
> > On 10-01-2021 22:44, Peter Ehlert wrote:
> > > On 1/9/21 5:04 PM, John Hasler wrote:
> > >> Carl Fink writes:
> > >>> I'm repeating the recommendation I've seen on this very list for
> > >>> decades.
> > >> It is an incorrect recommendation. Upgrading works well and is
> > >> supported and recommended by Debian.
> > >
> > > sometimes, but not always. I prefer Reinstall, it's painless
> > >
> > > https://wiki.debian.org/DebianUpgrade
> > >
> > > "Performing a release upgrade is not without risk. The upgrade may
> > > fail, leaving the system in a non-functioning state. USERS SHOULD
> > > BACKUP ALL DATA before attempting a release upgrade"
> >
> > Crossing the road is not without risk.
> > Reinstalling, is not without risk.
> > Neither is an upgrade.
> > In any case, there are protocols to observe and, that done, there's
> > little to fear.
> > I haven't had trouble for years.
> > update
> > safe-upgrade
> > Edit /etc/apt/sources.list
> > update
> > full-upgrade
> > And you're home and hosed.
> >
> > Unless you're running a server, it's a good idea to be running SID,
> > and then you don't have to worry about it anyway.
> >
> I'm sorry, but I'll respectfully disagree with the last suggestion:
> Sid is Debian unstable (and Sid as the Toy Story-derived distribution
> codename is named for the child next door who breaks toys)
>
> The difference between unstable / testing / stable comes down to rate
> of change and consequent instability.
>
> Sid changes daily - there may be times when significant amounts of
> packages are broken / uninstallable together - especially when
> there's an upgrade to one of the major desktop environments or
> something in the compilation chain which affects all packages
> (perhaps a change in compiler / OpenSSL settings).
>
> If you are very experienced in Debian breakage / can afford to wait
> until someone uploads fixes / it's a secondary machine that you are
> not absolutely dependent on - fine.
>
> Testing is the next step down towards stable. It still changes daily,
> but at a slower rate. There's no routine security patching.
> Transitions may still mean that large numbers of packages are
> uninstallable today. One a freeze kicks in and testing is being
> frozen to become the next stable, that's a lot easier.
>
> Stable is pretty much unconditionally stable. There are regular
> changes for security fixes: once in a while a packge may have to be
> removed from Debian entirely because it becomes unsupportable. You
> can, at your choice, follow from stable to oldstable to oldoldstable
> as the distribution moves through various LTS stages. LTS is
> supported by volunteers and (potentially) paid for support from
> Freexian.
>
> Stable is a good choice day to day, it's regularly updated with
> security fixes. Point releases occur every three months or so
> wrapping up fixes in the last quarter.
>
> Routinely recommending sid may be counterproductive for relatively
> inexperienced users. Similarly, you may have to fix problems if you
> routinely use large quantities of -backports software. Stability vs
> pace and brand new software is a neverending battle
>
> Just my opinion - as ever, your experience may well vary.
>
I'd agree. I'm in the process of rebuilding my sid workstation on
another drive in the same machine. The installation is only about six
years old, but it's slowly dying of software rot. There are something
like 60 broken, un-upgradeable packages, including apt, and some of
them have been that way for months. They are clearly not just waiting
for the rest of a suite, or a bug-fix. A few formerly working programs
are now not working. Nobody else seems to be complaining, so I've
decided it's my system and it's time to clean it up. Yes, if it was
just one or two packages, I'd fix them, but it isn't.
I thought of the --get-selections route, but decided against it. There
may be a few specific packages responsible for the problems. Certainly
an exact clone is exactly what I don't want. So I'm spending a lot of
time with apt, taking the opportunity to change a few packages, lose
some of those I suspect I never use, and re-learning how to configure
the larger packages.
Did you know it is possible to get the latest Firefox into a state
where it will not run, even after reinstalling? 'Replace/delete the
profile', say the gurus, and all will be well. 'Run the Profile
Manager'. The Profile Manager will not run because it can't find a
profile. How stupid is that, when it is the means of creating a new
profile? The fix was to copy the profile from the old installation,
which I'm trying to avoid doing because some of the problems I'm having
may well be due to damaged profiles or configurations. I want a shiny
new sid, not something containing rusty bits of the old one.
No, reinstall is not painless. Unless you have a perfectly-working
system to start with and you use one of the copying methods. If that is
so, why would you want to reinstall? And the time is coming to replace
my stretch server with buster. Having rendered a netbook unbootable by
means of the upgrade, I'm not doing that to my server...
--
Joe
Reply to: