Csányi Pál:
> 2011-08-29 15:44 keltezéssel, Jochen Spieker írta:
>>
>> I always keep testing entries in case I want to install an old version
>> easily.
>
> So you are mixing testing and unstable versions?
Only if I have to, which is not very often.
J.
--
Americans have a better life.
[Agree] [Disagree]
<http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>
08-29-2011, 03:55 PM
Wolodja Wentland
Upgrading Squeeze to SID
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 12:53 +0200, Csányi Pál wrote:
> I want to upgrade my desktop Debian Squeeze to Debian SID.
>
> I'm serching for howto how can I achieve my goal on debian website
> but without any success.
>
> http://www.debian.org/releases/sid/
> doesn't provide me with any information about upgrading from the
> stable or testing version to SID.
>
> Any advices will be appreciated!
Please also read http://wiki.debian.org/DebianUnstable in addition to the
article on Raphaël's blog.
--
Wolodja <babilen@gmail.com>
> If not, DON'T upgrade to *UNSTABLE* ('sid') distribution. 'sid' is the
> *UNSTABLE*, *very buggy*, *INCONSISTENT* distribution for *Debian
> developers only* - if U want new packages, use Debian Backports or
> *testing* (wheezy).
I think this might be overdoing the fear, uncertainty, and
doubt a trifle. Yes, unstable can be unstable at times. Packages are
pushed to Sid after testing on the developer box, but little
integration testing is done, so it is certainly possible that Sid might
be broken. In 16 years of running unstable, the number of times when I
have encountered major breakage can be counted on my fingers (and no
need to take off my socks).
I would not call it very buggy or inconsistent, and I don't
think this should be considered developer only (We do want technically
competent people testing Sid, so bugs do not get into testing).
Sid should be approached with caution, and if you do not feel
comfortable diagnosing the problem, and looking here or on the dev
mailing list, or on the bug tracking system for a work around and fixes,
you should certainly consider testing.
However, if you are comfortable with Linux, running Sid is an
option. I have been doing it forever (I do have a laptop, and I only
upgrade the laptop _after_ a successful upgrade of my devel box, so I
have at least one working machine)
manoj
--
You will not censor me through bug terrorism. James Troup
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.golden-gryphon.com/>
4096R/C5779A1C E37E 5EC5 2A01 DA25 AD20 05B6 CF48 9438 C577 9A1C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 877h5wuo6d.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com">http://lists.debian.org/877h5wuo6d.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com
08-29-2011, 07:39 PM
Joe
Upgrading Squeeze to SID
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 12:26:30 +0100
Lisi <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday 29 August 2011 12:05:47 SZERVÁC Attila wrote:
> > R U a Debian Developer?
> >
> > If not, DON'T upgrade to *UNSTABLE* ('sid') distribution. 'sid' is
> > the *UNSTABLE*, *very buggy*, *INCONSISTENT* distribution for
> > *Debian developers only* - if U want new packages, use Debian
> > Backports or *testing* (wheezy).
>
> That is a little harsh. Many people run Sid who are not DDs. Only
> run Sid if you are adept at sorting out problems and can cope if a
> package (perhaps one you use daily) is broken for a while: days, or
> perhaps a week, not months or years.
>
I would also say that was an exaggeration. If you have only one
computer, and rely on it totally, (a so-called 'production' system) then
I agree it is risky to run sid. Even if you know how to fix a breakage,
you may miss a deadline or lose important work. But if you have
multiple computers, or virtual computers, or you dual-boot, and you
have sensible data backup measures in place, then sid is relatively
harmless.
You do have to learn how to fix things, but that's always the case when
running Linux. Even Ubuntu needs a bit of a kicking now and then, and
testing is a long way short of Ubuntu in terms of spoon-feeding.
I have used sid for the large majority of work that does not use
proprietary hardware for over five years, during which time I have
needed to reinstall twice, due to insufficient knowledge to fix the
problems in a reasonable time. Since it is only a workstation, and my
data lives on a server (running stable), reinstallation was relatively
painless, and was fundamentally similar to what the OP wants to do i.e.
throw on a stable netinstall, change sources and dist-upgrade then
restore the previous packages.
There are a few sensible precautions in addition to data backup: keep a
fairly up-to-date package list, a full backup of /etc and a listing of
disc partitions, filesystems etc. But even if sid does break beyond
your ability to repair, you can almost certainly recover this
information from the system. It's not like a dead Windows installation,
which is normally unrecoverable unless it is a simple boot issue.
There is also a certain inconsistency in claiming that testing is only
ten days behind a 'very buggy' and 'inconsistent' distribution. Serious
problems don't get fixed that quickly, or at least not every time. And
testing will spend about the last half of its life frozen, getting no
further major upgrades and falling further and further behind sid until
the next release, at which point life in testing also becomes very
interesting for a while.
--
Joe
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20110829203902.3acd72cd@jretrading.com">http://lists.debian.org/20110829203902.3acd72cd@jretrading.com
08-29-2011, 07:59 PM
Sven Joachim
Upgrading Squeeze to SID
On 2011-08-29 19:23 +0200, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29 2011, SZERVĂC Attila wrote:
>
>> R U a Debian Developer?
>
>> If not, DON'T upgrade to *UNSTABLE* ('sid') distribution. 'sid' is the
>> *UNSTABLE*, *very buggy*, *INCONSISTENT* distribution for *Debian
>> developers only* - if U want new packages, use Debian Backports or
>> *testing* (wheezy).
>
> I think this might be overdoing the fear, uncertainty, and
> doubt a trifle. Yes, unstable can be unstable at times. Packages are
> pushed to Sid after testing on the developer box, but little
> integration testing is done, so it is certainly possible that Sid might
> be broken. In 16 years of running unstable, the number of times when I
> have encountered major breakage can be counted on my fingers (and no
> need to take off my socks).
While I've been using sid for not nearly as long (only about five
years), major breakage is indeed quite rare but it does happen. The
biggest issue this year was the suddenly lost path to the ELF
interpreterš on amd64.
But even normal breakage can be quite annoying, be it segfaults in your
RSS reader² or your video player³, or your MTA suddenly being unable to
authenticateâ´ to its relay host. Such disruptions probably occur much
less often in testing.
> However, if you are comfortable with Linux, running Sid is an
> option. I have been doing it forever (I do have a laptop, and I only
> upgrade the laptop _after_ a successful upgrade of my devel box, so I
> have at least one working machine)
Having a second machine is an important safety net, especially if the
breakage is so bad that you can't access the Internet any more to look
for solutions.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 87vctggf9j.fsf@turtle.gmx.de">http://lists.debian.org/87vctggf9j.fsf@turtle.gmx.de
Upgrading Squeeze to SID
