Re: (pure text) Re: Trouble upgrading Debian (reply to David Wright)
On Tue 07 Sep 2021 at 00:20:26 (-0300), Dedeco Balaco wrote:
> Em 06/09/2021 23:48, Kenneth Parker escreveu:
> > On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 7:58 PM Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 06, 2021 at 04:46:21PM -0300, Dedeco Balaco wrote:
> > > > If it is trivial to me setting my mail manager to use the dark
> > > > background i need, and to make it ignore the (usually default)
> > > > background of color of all HTML messages, why the people in Debian User
> > > > list cannot do it? I will not change my setting! I need it. Learn to
> > > > deal with it.
Perhaps the forums might suit you better than technical mailing lists.
> > > Many people will "deal with it" by deleting your messages and moving
> > > on. Just so you know.
> >
> > > For me, your messages seem OK. Mutt is presenting me with readable
> > > text. I don't know what other people are seeing. However, if you're
> > > intentionally flaunting the guidelines and standards that make mailing
> > > lists work, you can expect a smaller audience for your requests.
> >
> > Greg, what I saw is Rich Text Format [1], different from html. I
> > suspect Mutt (as well as gmail) presents it as it, without issue. But,
> > unfortunately, not all email reader software would see it properly.
As one might expect, mutt can handle multipart/alternative in various
ways, according to how you configure it. AFAICT the emails in question
are sensibly constructed, with text/plain and text/html equivalents.
> My issue happened (this is my conclusion) because my Debian 9 was not
> updated when I followed the steps to change sources.list to those of
> Debian 10. This is something that should be added in Debian
> documentation, in my opinion.
It's already there, as I pointed out and gave the reference for.
In bullseye, it was given even greater prominence by being given
an individual section number.
> It is also important to note that third
> party sources should be disabled, to avoid possible conflicts or
> problems that should be addressed only after the OS upgrade ends
> successfully.
Ditto.
> I also made something much wrong by not rebooting the computer after
> each 'apt upgrade' for the next version. So, i ended up with a computer
> with packages and sources.list of Debian 11, but it was not quite
> that.
That is implicit, in that each upgrade is expected to be followed by a
period during which that version is used. Rebooting ensures that any
new kernel is being used.
It's also explicit, in that a system running the previous version's
kernel is not a "pure" system, and unprepared for the next upgrade.
> So, i remade all steps. And my first steps were to restore my Debian 9
> sources.list, 'apt update' and 'apt upgrade' it.
I don't see how that works. Once you've upgraded by one version,
downgrading it again is a non-trivial operation. But I found it
difficult to follow precisely the steps you took.
> A more detailed story is in the thread i pointed in my first message here:
>
> https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-software-2/upgrading-debian-distribution-4175700202/#post6281677
I have already looked at that. There seem to be links to other forums,
debian.org, release notes for a different upgrade, etc. So my post,
later in the day, didn't add anything except emphasis: follow the
Release Notes in full. (It seemed that the mailing list was late in
being invited to the party.)
The problem with following random posts on the internet for upgrading
is that each one generally addresses a particular aspect where that OP
expressed some difficulty, but doesn't give the end-to-end method.
Cheers,
David.
Reply to: