Debian safe-upgrade to 6.0.2 - don't run within X session
 

If you run Debian on the desktop, note that the current updates
coming down the pipe for 6.0.2 with safe-upgrades
may include an xserver package update (did for me, and
mine was up to date before).

If you run your safe-upgrade from within an X windows

session, it will cause X to restart, interrupting the update.
If this happens, only some of your package updates
will have completed and some will be incomplete.
Nothing tragic will happen, you just have to run safe-upgrade

again outside of X environment (not in xterm, etc.)

I suspect for the same reasons use of Synaptic
to upgrade will also fail, but I did not verify its
behavior.

What is a good way to upgrade desktop systems

for this case, someone might be asking?

If you run desktop, use Ctrl+Alt+F2 to get into
a virtual terminal, login, and do your upgrade from
in there.* During upgrade to 6.0.2 packages, X will
restart, shutting down any X applications open

at the time without warning.* Use Ctrl+Alt+F8
to return to the X console once again.

Debian safe-upgrade to 6.0.2 - don't run within X session
 

On 27/06/11 22:27, D G Teed wrote:
> If you run Debian on the desktop, note that the current updates
> coming down the pipe for 6.0.2 with safe-upgrades
> may include an xserver package update (did for me, and
> mine was up to date before).
>
> If you run your safe-upgrade from within an X windows
> session, it will cause X to restart, interrupting the update.
> If this happens, only some of your package updates
> will have completed and some will be incomplete.
> Nothing tragic will happen, you just have to run safe-upgrade
> again outside of X environment (not in xterm, etc.)
>
> I suspect for the same reasons use of Synaptic
> to upgrade will also fail, but I did not verify its
> behavior.
>
> What is a good way to upgrade desktop systems
> for this case, someone might be asking?
>
> If you run desktop, use Ctrl+Alt+F2 to get into
> a virtual terminal, login, and do your upgrade from
> in there.� During upgrade to 6.0.2 packages, X will
> restart, shutting down any X applications open
> at the time without warning.� Use Ctrl+Alt+F8
> to return to the X console once again.
>
>

I've never had a desktop (KDE) session crash from an upgrade,
dist-upgrades are different.

# apt-get -d upgrade; apt-get upgrade
Is how I always upgrade.

apt apt-listchanges apt-utils base-files comerr-dev dbus dbus-x11
deborphan dpkg dpkg-dev e2fslibs
e2fsprogs git kdelibs-bin kdelibs5-data kdelibs5-plugins
kdenetwork-filesharing kdoctools klibc-utils
kopete krb5-multidev libcomerr2 libdbus-1-3 libdbus-1-dev libdpkg-perl
libgssapi-krb5-2 libgssrpc4
libk5crypto3 libkadm5clnt-mit7 libkadm5srv-mit7 libkdb5-4
libkde3support4 libkdecore5 libkdesu5
libkdeui5 libkdewebkit5 libkdnssd4 libkfile4 libkhtml5 libkimproxy4
libkio5 libkjsapi4 libkjsembed4
libklibc libkmediaplayer4 libknewstuff2-4 libknewstuff3-4
libknotifyconfig4 libkntlm4 libkopete4
libkparts4 libkpty4 libkrb5-3 libkrb5-dev libkrb5support0
libkrosscore4 libkrossui4 libktexteditor4
libkunitconversion4 libkutils4 libldap-2.4-2 libmms0 libnepomuk4
libnepomukquery4a libplasma3
libqt4-assistant libqt4-dbus libqt4-designer libqt4-gui libqt4-help
libqt4-network libqt4-opengl
libqt4-qt3support libqt4-script libqt4-scripttools libqt4-sql
libqt4-sql-mysql libqt4-sql-sqlite
libqt4-svg libqt4-test libqt4-webkit libqt4-xml libqt4-xmlpatterns
libqtcore4 libqtgui4 libruby1.8
libsmbclient libsolid4 libss2 libthreadweaver4 libtiff4 libtiff4-dev
libtiffxx0c2 libwbclient0
linux-base linux-headers-2.6.32-5-686 linux-headers-2.6.32-5-common
linux-image-2.6.32-5-686
linux-libc-dev python-apt python-apt-common python-gudev ruby1.8
samba-common samba-common-bin
xserver-xorg-video-tseng


The xserver package isn't one I use, perhaps that's the difference. I
also normally shut down any critical apps before running updates in a
konsole.

For dist-upgrades I logout, login to a console session as root and
shutdown the x-server before dist-upgrade.

Cheers

--
"I can't watch TV longer than five minutes without praying for nuclear
holocaust."
~ Bill Hicks


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4E0881F9.8050405@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/4E0881F9.8050405@gmail.com

Debian safe-upgrade to 6.0.2 - don't run within X session
 

D G Teed <donald.teed@gmail.com> wrote:
>If you run Debian on the desktop, note that the current updates
>coming down the pipe for 6.0.2 with safe-upgrades
>may include an xserver package update (did for me, and
>mine was up to date before).
>
>If you run your safe-upgrade from within an X windows
>session, it will cause X to restart, interrupting the update.
>If this happens, only some of your package updates
>will have completed and some will be incomplete.
>Nothing tragic will happen, you just have to run safe-upgrade
>again outside of X environment (not in xterm, etc.)
>
>I suspect for the same reasons use of Synaptic
>to upgrade will also fail, but I did not verify its
>behavior.
>
>What is a good way to upgrade desktop systems
>for this case, someone might be asking?
>
>If you run desktop, use Ctrl+Alt+F2 to get into
>a virtual terminal, login, and do your upgrade from
>in there. During upgrade to 6.0.2 packages, X will
>restart, shutting down any X applications open
>at the time without warning. Use Ctrl+Alt+F8
>to return to the X console once again.

The problem here is that some applications have to be restarted in
order for a specific update to take effect. At least apt-get asked me
if it was ok to restart some daemons such as gdm, sshd etc. Editing
gdm out of that list broke nothing, I’ll just have to restart GDM
before I can login again – but that happens automatically as soon as
I log out :)

Nevertheless, it is usually a good idea to stop anything critical
before running bigger updates, though I tend to just upgrade and
restart all my applications the next time I reboot, usually within
two to three weeks (because of a kernel upgrade, for example).

Best regards,

Claudius
--
Nothing ever becomes real until it is experienced.
-- John Keats
Please use GPG: ECB0C2C7 4A4C4046 446ADF86 C08112E5 D72CDBA4
http://chubig.net/ http://nightfall.org



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20110627152128.4f3f485c@ares.home.chubig.net">http ://lists.debian.org/20110627152128.4f3f485c@ares.home.chubig.net

Debian safe-upgrade to 6.0.2 - don't run within X session
 

Scott Ferguson:
>
> I've never had a desktop (KDE) session crash from an upgrade,
> dist-upgrades are different.

No, dist-upgrades aren't different.

The only difference between aptitude's "safe-upgrade" and "full-upgrade"
is that they use different algorithms for dependency resolution. The
upgrade process itself (unpacking, pre-/post-install scripts etc.) is
exactly the same in both cases. The same holds true for apt-get's
"upgrade" and "dist-upgrade".

J.
--
If I could travel through time I would go back to yesterday and
apologise.
[Agree] [Disagree]
<http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>

Debian safe-upgrade to 6.0.2 - don't run within X session
 

Thank you, Donald, for posting your tip about upgrading in a virtual
terminal. It worked.


Kind regards,

Hugh McComb


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: op.vxrfmrrxmjllqx@dhugh-debian6.ewetel.net">http://lists.debian.org/op.vxrfmrrxmjllqx@dhugh-debian6.ewetel.net

Debian safe-upgrade to 6.0.2 - don't run within X session
 

On 28/06/11 00:54, Jochen Schulz wrote:
> Scott Ferguson:
>>

<snipped>

>
> No, dist-upgrades aren't different.

If you believe that then file a bug report.

ref: man apt-get

upgrade is used to install the newest versions of all packages currently
installed on the system from the sources enumerated in
/etc/apt/sources.list. Packages currently installed with new versions
available are retrieved and upgraded; under no circumstances are
currently installed packages removed, or packages not already installed
retrieved and installed. New versions of currently installed packages
that cannot be upgraded without changing the install status of another
package will be left at their current version.

dist-upgrade, in addition to performing the function of upgrade, also
intelligently handles changing dependencies with new versions of
packages; apt-get has a "smart" conflict resolution system, and it will
attempt to upgrade the most important packages at the expense of less
important ones if necessary.

eg. if package a-0.0 is to be replaced with a-0.1 it'll be an "upgrade".
if package a-0.0 is deprecated and it's function is being replaced with
b-0.0 it'll be a dist-upgrade.

There is a difference.

>
> The only difference between aptitude's "safe-upgrade" and "full-upgrade"
> is that they use different algorithms for dependency resolution. The
> upgrade process itself (unpacking, pre-/post-install scripts etc.) is
> exactly the same in both cases.

I made no comment on aptitude.
The mechanism for installing packages has no bearing on the severity of
changes made by the process (the likely hood of disruption to core
services). upgrade is mild, dist-upgrade can be radical. In "theory"
(apt-get) upgrade should make only minor disruptions.


> The same holds true for apt-get's
> "upgrade" and "dist-upgrade".
>
> J.


Opening a vt will do nothing to "protect" any running x-apps. If
concerned about x-apps whilst doing an upgrade - logout of x and login
to a console then shutdown x.

If packages being upgraded by either upgrade or dist-upgrade break or
interrupt networking, then pre-downloading (-d) will enable the upgrade
to continue. Aptitude "probably" has the same, download new packages
before applying changes, ability.

It is not my desire to be wrong, I appreciate when my "belief" is
corrected and no offence will be taken. Please do so.

Note: I'm not writing of aptitude, likewise synaptic or other gui apt
handlers.

Cheers

--
"I have a scoop for you. I stole his act.
I camouflaged it with punchlines, and to really throw people off, I did
it before he did."
~ Bill Hicks (on Dennis Leary)


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4E0949BC.7070909@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/4E0949BC.7070909@gmail.com

Debian safe-upgrade to 6.0.2 - don't run within X session
 

Scott Ferguson:
> On 28/06/11 00:54, Jochen Schulz wrote:
>>
>> No, dist-upgrades aren't different.
>
> If you believe that then file a bug report.
>
> ref: man apt-get

Apparently we are talking at cross-purposes, but your quote doesn't
refute my claim: apt-get's upgrade and dist-upgrade only differ in
dependency resolution. The upgrade process *of individual packages* is
always the same.

> eg. if package a-0.0 is to be replaced with a-0.1 it'll be an "upgrade".
> if package a-0.0 is deprecated and it's function is being replaced with
> b-0.0 it'll be a dist-upgrade.
>
> There is a difference.

True. And I can imagine that in very few cases that leads to experiences
like the OP's. But I wouldn't attribute that to apt-get's mode of
operation. If a postinst script demands a restart of the login manager,
it does so regardless of how apt was called.

> The mechanism for installing packages has no bearing on the severity of
> changes made by the process (the likely hood of disruption to core
> services).

That's exactly what I wanted to point out.

> upgrade is mild, dist-upgrade can be radical. In "theory"
> (apt-get) upgrade should make only minor disruptions.

I don't think this distinction is helpful. You can have two systems with
a different set of packages installed, one needs a dist-upgrade for
a-0.1 to be installed, another one just needs a simple upgrade.

That doesn't mean people should make a habit of regularly using
dist-upgrades. That only leads to questions like "Why did apt-get remove
my whole desktop!?".

From a (sid) user's point of view, the main difference between upgrade
and dist-upgrade is that an upgrade doesn't require as much attention as
a dist-upgrade. On my sid laptop, I run update && upgrade once or twice
a day, and the only thing I actually look at is whether the upgrade
contains packages I care about and most of the time I skim over the
output to spot errors.

J.
--
I am no longer prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt.
[Agree] [Disagree]
<http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>

Debian safe-upgrade to 6.0.2 - don't run within X session
 

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 12:25 AM, Scott Ferguson <prettyfly.productions@gmail.com> wrote:



Opening a vt will do nothing to "protect" any running x-apps. If

concerned about x-apps whilst doing an upgrade - logout of x and login

to a console then shutdown x.

I'm afraid users could be confused by this and other statements.
There is a point to the original post which seems to be missed.

Logging out of X can be done, but optional as long as you

don't have important work to save within X applications.
What is "login to a console" in your description?
It is basically a VT or ssh in remotely.* A VT is very
valuable and we should avoid referencing it negatively

so everyone understands regardless of their usual language.

I don't think some people "get it" in terms of why I posted this.
Please read and consider fully...

Doing a dist-upgrade is a major upgrade.* It is done not so often and

done with the Debian upgrade guide nearby.* It tells
us very clearly to do dist-upgrade within a VT console or over ssh
session, and not within X.* End of debate on that.

Doing safe-upgrade (I refer to aptitude command line args here)

is done very often, and many people like myself have done it
within a Desktop X terminal window, for many years, quickly and routinely.
For 6.0.2, xserver is upgraded for the first time in a long time.
If users are desktop users, and don't realize what has happened,

the X restart could take them by surprise and they don't end up
truly upgrading all packages.* I can imagine this confusing
some users.

Personally, I don't want to close out all my Xsession windows each time

I do aptitude safe-upgrade, and I will continue to run it within X,
unless I see another case like 6.0.2 where part of X is getting
updated.

6.0.2 safe-upgrade was atypical, and thus the purpose of the post.

Debian safe-upgrade to 6.0.2 - don't run within X session
 

On 28/06/11 21:23, D G Teed wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 12:25 AM, Scott Ferguson
> <prettyfly.productions@gmail.com
> <mailto:prettyfly.productions@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
> Opening a vt will do nothing to "protect" any running x-apps. If
> concerned about x-apps whilst doing an upgrade - logout of x and login
> to a console then shutdown x.
>
>
> I'm afraid users could be confused by this and other statements.
> There is a point to the original post which seems to be missed.

Yes.

You are the only person I'm aware of reporting an incomplete upgrade.
(I've just checked again this morning)

Are you absolutely certain the update of the xserver package caused your
upgrade to fail??

Despite testing on a number of different Gnome and KDE desktops we saw
no problems with the upgrade - with the exception of a lack of a hint in
the Samba upgrade message on how to exit the message. Users were advised
how to exit that screen. If the updatemanager were not a safe and
convenient way to apply the 6.0.2 upgrade with minimal loss of
production - then apt-dater would have been run overnight.

If you did have a problem with that upgrade perhaps you should have
filed a bug report in addition to posting instructions on a work around.

Wheezy and Sid could be treated differently, but stable should be
treated as "it should work" and "if it doesn't work, fix it".

Not all users are administrators - for those users an updatemanager is
the preferred way of doing things.

It is not my intention to be rude by not addressing the many other
points you've made. They just don't seem relevant - even though I'd
digressed by addressing them in a previous post.

And I'm not saying you are being untruthful - but I have yet to find one
other case of an incomplete upgrade or any other problems where a fully
updated, unmixed repository build, required the user to use a vt and cli
to apply the 6.0.2 upgrade.

If you feel strongly that there is a problem (other than the samba
message) - then post your logs and details as a bug report. If there is
not a problem - posting a work-around that advices users to switch to a
vt *does* cause problems in an administered environment. Especially when
commercial vendors seize of the use of cli as a reason not to have
GNU-Linux on the desktop.

Cheers

--
"I just have one of those faces.
People come up to me and say, "What's wrong?"
Nothing.
"Well, it takes more energy to frown than it does to smile."
Yeah, you know it takes more energy to point that out than it does to
leave me alone?"
~ Bill Hicks


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4E0A9C4C.90009@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/4E0A9C4C.90009@gmail.com

Debian safe-upgrade to 6.0.2 - don't run within X session
 

On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 12:30 AM, Scott Ferguson <prettyfly.productions@gmail.com> wrote:


Yes.



You are the only person I'm aware of reporting an incomplete upgrade.

(I've just checked again this morning)



Are you absolutely certain the update of the xserver package caused your

upgrade to fail??

Yes I believe it was during the configuration stage
it had the X or gdm restart.** One poster on here referenced
a prompt asking whether it was OK to restart gdm.
This isn't a production system so I wasn't paying careful

attention to whether it asked about that.* I was working
on something else in another window at the time.
It may have warned gdm would be restarted and I just
said go ahead without reading it - as it usually prompts for

this for services impacted by for example pam updates
and I'm never concerned about restarting those services.

Unfortunately I can't reproduce this and watch more carefully.

Later when X was restarted and I redid aptitude safe-upgrade,

it showed about a dozen packages awaiting configuration and
another dozen or so to install.* I would have taken better notes
if I thought this was a bug but I thought it was just me
not taking the precautions I should.* All I have as a record

is /var/log/aptitude and it doesn't show failures or aborts.




Despite testing on a number of different Gnome and KDE desktops we saw

no problems with the upgrade - with the exception of a lack of a hint in

the Samba upgrade message on how to exit the message. Users were advised

how to exit that screen.
I did see the samba notification and read it.* I remember
that happening.* Less is already known to me as the pager
so no surprises there.

Yes, I was watching the list to see if anyone else was bitten and saw none.* Perhaps my system was an oddball.* It is an Atom 230

based system.