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
===