This is part of The Pile, a partial archive of some open source mailing lists and newsgroups.
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 23:52:31 -0700 From: Stephen P Williams <stephen_p_williams@pacbell.net> To: svlug@svlug.org Subject: [svlug] Question about "apt-get dist-upgrade" Hey guys, After spending my first few Linux years firmly in the RPM distro camp, I've decided to try the one true Debian way. My box at work is now running a fairly basic Debian 'potato' setup, and I've decided that this is just a tad too held back for me and I would like to move forward to 'testing'. However, the documentation for 'apt-get dist-upgrade' leaves me just a little more than baffled. 1. I read the apt-get man page and the online manual. 2. I've seen the blurb on Debian's web page saying 'add the following to your /etc/apt/sources.list' and added those lines 3. I've run 'apt-get --simulate dist-upgrade' I'm looking at about thirteen 'kept back packages' and I'm wondering what I need to do about them before or after letting 'dist-upgrade' rip my system apart. Here's the part of the output that bugs me: The following packages have been kept back base-config console-data gdm lib-xt-java libpaperg lilo mpage nethack psutils xfs xscreensaver xserver-common xserver-svga 384 packages upgraded, 79 newly installed, 26 to remove and 13 not upgraded. I'm pretty sure that I can take care of 'gdm', 'mpage', 'nethack', 'psutils' and probably 'xscreensaver' by executing 'apt-get remove ...' The others seem pretty low-level, and I have no idea what to do about them. I'm hoping that some of you who are more indoctrinated in the Debian way can please shed some light on these questions: 1. Should one remove all references to 'stable' when performing a 'dist-upgrade' or should they be left in-place? 2. Is there any order dependency in '/etc/apt/sources.list'? If so, how does it work when planning a 'dist-upgrade'? 3. What is required to dispatch the 'kept back' packages? Pointers to fine manuals to read would be greatly appreciated (other than 'man apt-get' and '/usr/share/doc/apt/guide.html/index.html'), neither of which gives me the warm fuzzies about the "dist-upgrade" process. Thanks in advance, Steve Williams === From: Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <mail@gorilla.it> To: svlug@svlug.org Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:35:41 +0200 Subject: [svlug] modprobe modules.conf /lib/modules modules_install After RTFM, at least all the ones I've been able to find I still have some doubt about how all this work. from man modprobe: > When you install a new linux, the modules should be moved > to a directory related to the release (and version) of the > kernel you are installing. Isn't this done by modules_install? > Then you should do a symlink > from this directory to the "default" directory. What is the default directory? /lib/modules/kernelv/type -> /lib/modules/type ??? > Each time you compile a new kernel, the command make > modules_install will create a new directory, but won't > change the ooops a part of the man is missing on my system. > When you get a module unrelated to the kernel distribution > you should place it in one of the version-independent > directories under /lib/modules. OK... isn't it enough a symlink? sometimes modprobe complain about creation date of modules.conf and modules.dep. Should I run make dep, make install_modules each time I change modules.conf? And what about modules not part of the kernel source? How can I have info on compiled modules of different kernels from the one I'm running? Different kernels have different modules.pcimap modules.usbmap. Older kernel have more complete map. Can I overvrite new kernel files with old kernel files? Finally ALSA drivers came with the source code. I did ./configure --with-isapnp=yes make install but the only copy I can find of all the modules (.o) I need are in /lib/modules/oldkernel/misc and they have been installed by SuSE and not by me. Is there somewhere a more detailed description of how all this works including make dep, make modules_install? TIA === To: Stephen P Williams <stephen_p_williams@pacbell.net> Subject: Re: [svlug] Question about "apt-get dist-upgrade" Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 09:30:35 -0700 From: J C Lawrence <claw@kanga.nu> On Wed, 23 May 2001 23:52:31 -0700 Stephen P Williams <Stephen> wrote: > Hey guys, After spending my first few Linux years firmly in the > RPM distro camp, I've decided to try the one true Debian way. My > box at work is now running a fairly basic Debian 'potato' setup, > and I've decided that this is just a tad too held back for me and > I would like to move forward to 'testing'. However, the > documentation for 'apt-get dist-upgrade' leaves me just a little > more than baffled. > 1. I read the apt-get man page and the online manual. > 2. I've seen the blurb on Debian's web page saying 'add the > following to your /etc/apt/sources.list' and added those lines Good. You'll likely want to edit /etc/apt/apt.conf to something like: --<cut>-- APT { Get { Show-Upgraded "true"; }; }; --<cut>-- So you can really see what is going on. > 3. I've run 'apt-get --simulate dist-upgrade' Do an apt-get upgrade first, then an apt-get dist-upgrade. Why? While its likely been fixed by now, I got stuck having to manually resolve dependency loops when trying to go straight to a dist-upgrade a couple times. > I'm looking at about thirteen 'kept back packages' and I'm > wondering what I need to do about them before or after letting > 'dist-upgrade' rip my system apart. Ignore 'em. They literally have no significance. > Here's the part of the output that bugs me: > The following packages have been kept back base-config > console-data gdm lib-xt-java libpaperg lilo mpage nethack psutils > xfs xscreensaver xserver-common xserver-svga 384 packages > upgraded, 79 newly installed, 26 to remove and 13 not upgraded. I strongly suggest installing either aptitude or console-apt (I prefer aptitude). You can then easily use that to wander your dependency graph and see why what is being held back etc. Likely there's a key package or two that are stuck for some reason. To get aptitude add the following to etc/apt/sources.list: deb http://aptitude.sourceforge.net/debian ./ deb-src http://aptitude.sourceforge.net/debian ./ > 1. Should one remove all references to 'stable' when performing a > 'dist-upgrade' or should they be left in-place? Leave 'em in place. I do. My full /etc/apts/sources.list: --<cut>-- # # Official sources # #deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free #deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US/ unstable non-US/main non-US/contrib non-US/non-free #deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ testing main contrib non-free deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US/ testing non-US/main non-US/contrib non-US/non-free deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ testing main contrib non-free deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ woody main contrib non-free deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US/ woody non-US/main non-US/contrib non-US/non-free deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ woody main contrib non-free deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ potato main contrib non-free deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US/ potato non-US/main non-US/contrib non-US/non-free deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ potato main contrib non-free deb ftp://ftp.us.debian.org/debian dists/proposed-updates/ # # Unofficial debs () # # Aptitude is a new APT frontend which aims to test the limits of # what an APT frontend can do. deb http://aptitude.sourceforge.net/debian ./ deb-src http://aptitude.sourceforge.net/debian ./ # Joey Hess' stuff deb http://kitenet.net/programs/code/debian / # DENTS deb http://www.promera.nl/dents/debian i386/ # deb-src http://www.promera.nl/dents/debian source/ # TkMAN # deb http://ftp.linux.org.il/pub/local-dev/shaulk ./ # PortSentry deb http://honk.physik.uni-konstanz.de/~agx/debian stable main # Muddleftpd # deb http://members.home.com/decklin/ experimental/ # OpenRock's stuff # deb http://openrock.net/tb/ local/binary-i386/ ## DNScache et al deb http://www.codepark.org/debian/ stable main # Miscellaneous packages (some xmms plugins, a fractal screensaver, an icq and # aim clone, task-ximian packages, etc) that I have put together. These are # compiled against Testing/Woody, some with some Ximian Gnome updates. Should # work under Unstable. deb http://zork.net/~orion unstable main # Postgres CVS # deb http://www.markybob.com/pgsql/cvs/ ./ # Lopster # deb http://www.markybob.com/lopster/lopdeb/ ./ # 100+ misc. unofficial packages: Newest netatalk beta, mindterm, twig, # webcal, netatalk 1.4b2+asun2.1.4.pre39test, apache w/ includes-patch, # Basilisk II, migrationtools, mp3sb, popa3d, pop-before-smtp. deb http://debian.jones.dk/debian/local/ sid misc mpserver deb-src http://debian.jones.dk/debian/local/ woody misc --<cut>-- > 2. Is there any order dependency in '/etc/apt/sources.list'? If > so, how does it work when planning a 'dist-upgrade'? No order dependency. > 3. What is required to dispatch the 'kept back' packages? Don't bother. All it means that is that upgrading that package would break the dependancy graph in some way. This is not a problem, it is a feature. You are looking at one of the Very Good Things about Debian. -- J C Lawrence claw@kanga.nu ---------(*) http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ The pressure to survive and rhetoric may make strange bedfellows === Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 12:34:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Christopher William Wesley <cwwesley@udlug.org> To: <svlug@svlug.org> Subject: Re: [svlug] Question about "apt-get dist-upgrade" On Wed, 23 May 2001, Stephen P Williams wrote: > I've decided to try the one true Debian way. My box at work is now Welcome! :) > 1. Should one remove all references to 'stable' when performing a > 'dist-upgrade' or should they be left in-place? Absolutely. Moving from potato (aka stable) to woody (aka testing), replace all occurrences of "potato" with "woody". > 2. Is there any order dependency in '/etc/apt/sources.list'? If so, > how does it work when planning a 'dist-upgrade'? Nope. > 3. What is required to dispatch the 'kept back' packages? When packages are kept back, they have new versions in the dist you're upgrading to, but all of their _new_ dependencies won't be met. Apt figures out that if it tried to meet the new dependencies for a [soon-to-be held-back] package then a dependency for another, "more important" package will be flubbed ... hence, holding the less important package back. What makes one package more important than another, I don't completely understand yet. When you've finished the dist-upgrade, try apt-get install on the packages that were held back, and it will prompt you to solve some dependencies (by installing new packages, upgrading others, or maybe removing something). ~Chris /"\ \ / Pine Ribbon Campaign Microsoft Security Specialist X Against Outlook The moron in Oxymoron. / \ http://www.thebackrow.net ===