Final 2.1 upgrade tests
 

Hi Free,

I decided to test upgrading a clean install of 2.0 amd64 to 2.1 using
only Synaptic and mirrorservice.org. It worked fine, with the following
notes...

1. ardour, ktoon, and I think qsampler were held back in the first 'mark
all upgrades'.

2. ktoon and whatever other Qt app it was got upgraded on the second
pass, I guess because they needed a newer Qt4 package.

3. ardour only gets upgraded to 2.4 if you mark it manually, because the
fftw3 package needs to be replaced.

4. There was a question about restarting libssl services, no big deal.

5. There's a question about replacing the contents of 64studio.list,
again no big deal because either keep or replace is fine. Keep is the
correct answer for people using an apt mirror, because the default file
specifies the main apt.64studio.com server.

All in all, I was really pleased with how smoothly it went :-)

By the way, I've updated the readme files on the rsync feed, as some
were still 2.0 versions.

Next I'm going to test the linuxaudio.org mirror with an upgrade from
clean 2.0 i386. After that, I think we can issue the press release ;-)

Cheers!

Daniel

_______________________________________________
64studio-devel mailing list
64studio-devel@64studio.com
http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-devel

Final 2.1 upgrade tests
 

Hi Daniel,

|--==> Daniel James writes:

DJ> Hi Free,
DJ> I decided to test upgrading a clean install of 2.0 amd64 to 2.1 using
DJ> only Synaptic and mirrorservice.org. It worked fine, with the
DJ> following notes...

DJ> 1. ardour, ktoon, and I think qsampler were held back in the first
DJ> mark all upgrades'.

DJ> 2. ktoon and whatever other Qt app it was got upgraded on the second
DJ> pass, I guess because they needed a newer Qt4 package.

DJ> 3. ardour only gets upgraded to 2.4 if you mark it manually, because
DJ> the fftw3 package needs to be replaced.

DJ> 4. There was a question about restarting libssl services, no big deal.

DJ> 5. There's a question about replacing the contents of 64studio.list,
DJ> again no big deal because either keep or replace is fine. Keep is the
DJ> correct answer for people using an apt mirror, because the default
DJ> file specifies the main apt.64studio.com server.

DJ> All in all, I was really pleased with how smoothly it went :-)

Thanks for the detailed report. I expect many people to have non-pure
64 Studio 2.0 at this time, but of course testing clean 2.0 -> 2.1 is
actually the only thing we can support.

DJ> By the way, I've updated the readme files on the rsync feed, as some
DJ> were still 2.0 versions.

DJ> Next I'm going to test the linuxaudio.org mirror with an upgrade from
DJ> clean 2.0 i386. After that, I think we can issue the press release ;-)

Ok, I've just rebuilt the 2.1 images an APT repo. Please would you
take care of copying them to the directory from where the rsync-ed
mirrors pull the updates?

Ciao,

Free

_______________________________________________
64studio-devel mailing list
64studio-devel@64studio.com
http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-devel