In place upgrade 12>>12.1
Peter
installed the upgrade on a new partition and rebuilt all the
customizations. I did this for all the obvious reasons, but most important
because I have upgraded and/or recompiled versions or customizations of
some stock packages and I was concerned of overwriting them.
Nonetheless, I wanted comments about user experience with the in place
upgrade. I'm backing up the / partition now, but wanted to see how others
liked or disliked the experience.
TIA
--
Peter
alkos333
Went very smoothly every time. Just read UPGRADE.TXT and
CHANGES_AND_HINTS.TXT before or while you are upgrading and you
should be ok.
slakmagik
I can't speak to all possible configurations and I tend to follow
-current most of the time on most machines but when I do upgrade
releases, like you, I originally did complicated painful things to
upgrade and came to simply upgrade in place and have had no problems
with it. Just follow UPGRADE.TXT and the ChangeLog/CHANGE_AND_HINTS
carefully. Your config files (with the .new mechanism) should generally
be safe and non-slack packages should of course be safe. If you have a
customized package of something that is already in Slackware, it'll only
do what you tell it - give it the precise command(s) of what you do and
don't want to upgrade. At worst, if you have the tgz laying around,
reinstalling the individual package(s) would probably be simpler than
trying to migrate/recreate the whole system separately.
In short: good experiences; I recommend it.
The only downside is that it doesn't have that squeaky clean feeling
with the fresh new-system scent. ;)
Peter
snip.
>
> In short: good experiences; I recommend it.
>
> The only downside is that it doesn't have that squeaky clean feeling
> with the fresh new-system scent. ;)
Thank you both. I expected as much. I worry b/c I have upgraded many
packages manuallym including glibc and gtk+ (for gnome mostly) and don't
want to create dependency hassles.
The fresh new scent is something I don't relish b/c it means days of
recompiling. I'm backed up and maybe I'll give it a go.
Anyone with a not so pristine experience?
--
Peter
Peter
snip...
>
> I've been doing it for many releases now, without a single glitch except
> for when Pat split some packages when he released 12.0, but the changes
> and upgrade file clearly stated this and what to do, so, so long as you
> follow the information, you wont have any hassles, I've been using
> slapt-get for distro upgrade for a long time, best thing is there is no
> need for downtime on production servers, a simple 1 min reboot to make
> the new version active.
>
snip...
OK, one final question.
What happens when I do upgradepkg --install-new for a package group, but I
have several installed that are newer? Will my newer packages be
overwritten? For example, I have glib2 2.16.3 installed yet Slackware 12.1
has version 2.14.6. When I upgrade the 'l' directory, will that get
overwritten?
Thanks again for all your feedback
--
Peter
Giovanni
> What happens when I do upgradepkg --install-new for a package
> group, but I have several installed that are newer? Will my newer
> packages be overwritten? For example, I have glib2 2.16.3 installed
> yet Slackware 12.1 has version 2.14.6. When I upgrade the 'l'
> directory, will that get overwritten?
Yes it will be overwritten. upgradepkg does not look for newer
packages but only for different versions.
I usually run upgradepkg with the option --dry-run to build a batch of
the packages that will be upgraded or not. Then I remove from the
list the ones I don't want upgraded.
Ciao
Giovanni
--
A computer is like an air conditioner,
it stops working when you open Windows.
Registered Linux user #337974 < http://giovanni.homelinux.net/ >
Peter
> On 05/05/08 11:46, Peter wrote:
>
>> What happens when I do upgradepkg --install-new for a package group,
>> but I have several installed that are newer? Will my newer packages be
>> overwritten? For example, I have glib2 2.16.3 installed yet Slackware
>> 12.1 has version 2.14.6. When I upgrade the 'l' directory, will that
>> get overwritten?
>
> Yes it will be overwritten. upgradepkg does not look for newer packages
> but only for different versions.
>
> I usually run upgradepkg with the option --dry-run to build a batch of
> the packages that will be upgraded or not. Then I remove from the list
> the ones I don't want upgraded.
>
> Ciao
> Giovanni
Thank you for the suggestion. Saves a lot of time and angst!
--
Peter
Peter
snip...
>
> I usually run upgradepkg with the option --dry-run to build a batch of
> the packages that will be upgraded or not. Then I remove from the list
> the ones I don't want upgraded.
>
> Ciao
> Giovanni
Thank you very much. I followed your suggestion with the dry-run
parameter. I was very please to see that I could easily identify my
packages because I use a standard suffix -1pe for all my packages and I
could easily grep them. Turns out a lot of my packages were added, not
updates to stock packages. Others were brought to the same or higher
version by Slackware.
I will probably get to it over the weekend, but it looks like it will not
be a big deal.
Thanks again.
--
Peter
The Real Bev
That would be me. We spent all day yesterday on dealing with my 11.0
machine and I'm really discouraged. A lot of X stuff won't work. The
adobe and truetype fonts, xmms, gimp, WordPerfect (irreplaceable now),
and probably a lot of other stuff I just haven't gotten around to yet.
To make it worse, my husband (who regards GUIs as perversions) did it
easily on his machine.
This always happens and is why I don't upgrade until I can't do
something I really want to do (in this case Firefox3, which is another
disappointment -- I'm sure that sooner or later all the extensions will
work again, but not this week...).
First question: Does 12.1 deal with fonts in a very different way from
11? The subdirectory containing the config file that lists the font
paths seems to be either missing or elsewhere in 12.1. Can somebody
point me to a useful document written after 1998? I'm tired of beating
my head against the wall about such a trivial-yet-essential thing as the
adobe and truetype fonts which are there, mentioned in xorg.conf, and
yet remain stubbornly invisible.
TIA
--
Cheers, Bev
**********************************************
"I've had a Lucas pacemaker for years and have
never experienced any prob
The Real Bev
> Peter wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 04 May 2008 19:39:12 +0000, slakmagik wrote:
>>
>> snip.
>>>
>>> In short: good experiences; I recommend it.
>>>
>>> The only downside is that it doesn't have that squeaky clean feeling
>>> with the fresh new-system scent. ;)
>>
>> Thank you both. I expected as much. I worry b/c I have upgraded many
>> packages manuallym including glibc and gtk+ (for gnome mostly) and don't
>> want to create dependency hassles.
>>
>> The fresh new scent is something I don't relish b/c it means days of
>> recompiling. I'm backed up and maybe I'll give it a go.
>>
>> Anyone with a not so pristine experience?
>
> That would be me. We spent all day yesterday on dealing with my 11.0
> machine and I'm really discouraged. A lot of X stuff won't work. The
> adobe and truetype fonts, xmms, gimp, WordPerfect (irreplaceable now),
> and probably a lot of other stuff I just haven't gotten around to yet.
>
> To make it worse, my husband (who regards GUIs as perversions) did it
> easily on his machine.
>
> This always happens and is why I don't upgrade until I can't do
> something I really want to do (in this case Firefox3, which is another
> disappointment -- I'm sure that sooner or later all the extensions will
> work again, but not this week...).
I'll check back in a couple of months. No hurry. Not only do I NOT do
bleeding-edge stuff, I wait until the scabs are ready to be picked off.
> First question: Does 12.1 deal with fonts in a very different way from
> 11? The subdirectory containing the config file that lists the font
> paths seems to be either missing or elsewhere in 12.1. Can somebody
> point me to a useful document written after 1998? I'm tired of beating
> my head against the wall about such a trivial-yet-essential thing as the
> adobe and truetype fonts which are there, mentioned in xorg.conf, and
> yet remain stubbornly invisible.
OK, the serious problems are solved thanks to my live-in
consultant/spouse, who wrote a nice script for me.
I'm going to have to hunt down and implement the adobe fonts, but
substituting -monotype-arial-*-r-*-*-*-80-*-*-*-*-*-* for the helvetica
fonts in my .fvwm95rc (because that was the most completely configured
window manager back in 1995 and I'm [obviously] lazy, that's why!) and
juggling the font paths around in my xorg.conf did the trick -- in the
test case. Now I just have to do it again...
---------------section of new xorg.conf--------------------
# /usr/share/fonts/misc added because xfontsel couldn't find the
# 8859 fonts for some inexplicable reason.
Section "Files"
RgbPath "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/rgb"
ModulePath "/usr/X11R6/lib/modules"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/misc/"
FontPath "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/misc/"
FontPath "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/TTF/"
FontPath "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1/"
FontPath "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/CID/"
FontPath "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/75dpi/"
FontPath "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/100dpi/"
FontPath "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/OTF/"
FontPath "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Speedo/"
FontPath "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/afms/"
FontPath "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/afms/adobe/"
FontPath "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/util/"
FontPath "/usr/ttfonts/"
-------------------
So far, so good.
--
Cheers,
Bev
------------------------------------------------------
"Don't bother looking for that key. There is no Esc."
-- M. Tabnik