Posted by
michael
on from the solid-as-a-rock dept.
Debian potato has been updated to 2.2r5. See the press release for info on what has changed - mostly bugfixes, of course, since this is the stable distribution.
Actually, it's not bugfixes
by
bconway
·
· Score: 4, Informative
It's a release for security updates. This is very different from a bugfix release, which would generally be a much greater undertaking and require a lot more packages to be upgraded to newer versions. Think of it this way: a security update would be when Slash code allows users to gain the access levels of other users, including elevated privileges. A bugfix release would be an increment in the Slash code that fixes broken features that do not include security compromises. Makes sense? =)
stable vs. unstable
by
dboyles
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I run Debian "unstable" on 3 out of the 5 boxes that I admin (personal use, not corporate). For the most part I prefer unstable because of the newer software that it allows access to. Some software isn't available in.deb form in the stable distribution ("gallery", for example, an online photo gallery system). Other software varies a lot between the stable and unstable distributions ("unstable" software being more advanced, usually). For the most part "unstable" is a misnomer.
But... there are those times when something breaks. This is the reason you shouldn't use unstable on a production box. Earlier this week I worked out a KSpread spreadsheet that I needed for a meeting with an advisor. The day for my meeting came and KSpread wouldn't open up because of a conflict with the libpng version. To the best of my knowledge this hasn't been fixed yet. Others report similar problems. Needless to say I wasn't pleased, and I had to go to my meeting without the spreadsheet.
Does that mean I'll stop using "unstable"? Nah. Should everybody use it? No way.
-- --
"Complacency is a far more dangerous attitude than outrage." -Naomi Littlebear
Re:stable vs. unstable
by
FlyingDragon
·
· Score: 5, Informative
If you find stable a bit stoic and unstable a little wild, Debian has another distribution you may find just right: testing.
Testing consists of packages from unstable that have gone a couple weeks without incident. The result is a very current system with the bleeding edge problems smoothed over. Most of our production boxes are now on it.
[Joey Hess's] requirements for packages to go into stable:
1. The package fixes a security problem. An advisory by our own Security Team would be quite helpful.
2. The package fixes a critical bug which can lead into data loss, data corruption, or an overly broken system, or the package is broken or not usable (anymore).
3. The stable version of the package is not installable at all due to broken or unmet dependencies or broken installation scripts
4. The package gets all architectures in stable in sync.
5. All released architectures have to be in sync.
-- Look out honey, 'cause I'm using technology;
Ain't got time to make no apology
Re:And I just put 2.2r4 on yesterday....
by
steveha
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Let me just ask a general question then - what's the best way to install a fresh Woody system? My current system is a bastardized Potato with some ugly Sid stuff thrown in to make it complicated. I want a Woody system, upgraded to a 2.4 kernel with ipfilter, and I'm willing to start from scratch.
Do I remove all non-Woody sources from the apt-get sources file? Do I manually remove all potato and unstable packages? Or is it best to format and start over?
First of all, if the only thing you really want is a 2.4.x kernel and ipfilter, you don't need to upgrade everything; you could just get kernel sources, build a 2.4.x kernel, and go from there.
But if you want to update your system, here is what to do:
Edit your sources.list file to point to a Debian mirror for the "unstable" packages. (Or "testing" if you want to try that, but I'm perfectly happy with unstable.)
Run "apt-get update", which fetches the list of new packages.
Run "apt-get dist-upgrade", which downloads the new packages and installs them.
The Debian APT system is really cool, but it isn't absolutely perfect. It will try to install packages like libc first, and then later on install packages that depend on the other packages; but sometimes it fails. Sometimes it will try to install a package, only to have the install fail because some needed package wasn't there. This especially happens when upgrading from Potato to unstable.
The solution is simple: you just keep running "apt-get dist-upgrade", over and over, until it reports that all packages installed. Each time more packages will install, as the dependencies get installed.
I've done this about twice, and that's what worked for me.
steveha
-- lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
A comprehensive list of which packages were included and which were rejected is at http://people.debian.org/~joey/2.2r5/full.html
It's a release for security updates. This is very different from a bugfix release, which would generally be a much greater undertaking and require a lot more packages to be upgraded to newer versions. Think of it this way: a security update would be when Slash code allows users to gain the access levels of other users, including elevated privileges. A bugfix release would be an increment in the Slash code that fixes broken features that do not include security compromises. Makes sense? =)
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
I run Debian "unstable" on 3 out of the 5 boxes that I admin (personal use, not corporate). For the most part I prefer unstable because of the newer software that it allows access to. Some software isn't available in .deb form in the stable distribution ("gallery", for example, an online photo gallery system). Other software varies a lot between the stable and unstable distributions ("unstable" software being more advanced, usually). For the most part "unstable" is a misnomer.
But... there are those times when something breaks. This is the reason you shouldn't use unstable on a production box. Earlier this week I worked out a KSpread spreadsheet that I needed for a meeting with an advisor. The day for my meeting came and KSpread wouldn't open up because of a conflict with the libpng version. To the best of my knowledge this hasn't been fixed yet. Others report similar problems. Needless to say I wasn't pleased, and I had to go to my meeting without the spreadsheet.
Does that mean I'll stop using "unstable"? Nah. Should everybody use it? No way.
-- "Complacency is a far more dangerous attitude than outrage." -Naomi Littlebear
Actually, isn't "unstable" 'Sid'? I think 'Woody' is the "testing" release.
Wow, you're going to get 32767 responses to this.
1. #vi /etc/apt/sources.list
2. Change all instances of "stable" or "potato" to "woody".
3. #apt-get dist-upgrade
(4.) #apt-get -f install ;apt-get dist-upgrade --yes , until it all works.
In fact, here are the requirements for a package to make it into a Debian stable revision:
(from http://people.debian.org/~joey/2.2r5/)
[Joey Hess's] requirements for packages to go into stable:
1. The package fixes a security problem. An advisory by our own Security Team would be quite helpful.
2. The package fixes a critical bug which can lead into data loss, data corruption, or an overly broken system, or the package is broken or not usable (anymore).
3. The stable version of the package is not installable at all due to broken or unmet dependencies or broken installation scripts
4. The package gets all architectures in stable in sync.
5. All released architectures have to be in sync.
Look out honey, 'cause I'm using technology; Ain't got time to make no apology
Let me just ask a general question then - what's the best way to install a fresh Woody system? My current system is a bastardized Potato with some ugly Sid stuff thrown in to make it complicated. I want a Woody system, upgraded to a 2.4 kernel with ipfilter, and I'm willing to start from scratch.
Do I remove all non-Woody sources from the apt-get sources file? Do I manually remove all potato and unstable packages? Or is it best to format and start over?
First of all, if the only thing you really want is a 2.4.x kernel and ipfilter, you don't need to upgrade everything; you could just get kernel sources, build a 2.4.x kernel, and go from there.
But if you want to update your system, here is what to do:
Edit your sources.list file to point to a Debian mirror for the "unstable" packages. (Or "testing" if you want to try that, but I'm perfectly happy with unstable.)
Run "apt-get update", which fetches the list of new packages.
Run "apt-get dist-upgrade", which downloads the new packages and installs them.
The Debian APT system is really cool, but it isn't absolutely perfect. It will try to install packages like libc first, and then later on install packages that depend on the other packages; but sometimes it fails. Sometimes it will try to install a package, only to have the install fail because some needed package wasn't there. This especially happens when upgrading from Potato to unstable.
The solution is simple: you just keep running "apt-get dist-upgrade", over and over, until it reports that all packages installed. Each time more packages will install, as the dependencies get installed.
I've done this about twice, and that's what worked for me.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely