I'm in the process of doing an upgrade from 6.4 to 7.1. yast2 presented me with three packages which had *lower* version numbers on the 7.1 distribution, than I had loaded from the 6.4 distribution. I told it to go ahead and replace the packages anyway, figuring that you must know something I don't know. In other upgrades, I've encountered some packages which were 'split' into two or more new packages. Since I just told it to replace existing packages, and then add the minimum of new packages to resolve dependencies, will I have a complete system? Is there some list somewhere of 'split' packages, so I will know which packages I have to install to get back the full functionality I had? How about 'renamed' packages? Are there any packages which contain the same programs, but which go by different names between 6.4 and 7.1? Will I have to manually uninstall the old and install the new ones? -- Rick Green "I have the heart of a little child, and the brain of a genius. ... and I keep them in a jar under my bed"
I learned the hard way that the best way to upgrade is clean install. I tried to upgrade 7.0 to 7.1. The net result is X server which does not start, yast2 does not start, a lot of packages missing files. Finally, after a lost day of work I did a clean install. My /home was on a separate partition, and I saved my /etc from 7.0 before doing clean install. It looks like we are back to Slackware circa 1995 when a new realease of distribution meant a clean install. RPM and YaST supposed upgradeability of the system. But now the difference even between the releases within one major version number appear to be too big. -Kastus On Sat, Mar 31, 2001 at 01:54:41AM -0500, Rick Green wrote:
I'm in the process of doing an upgrade from 6.4 to 7.1. yast2 presented me with three packages which had *lower* version numbers on the 7.1 distribution, than I had loaded from the 6.4 distribution. I told it to go ahead and replace the packages anyway, figuring that you must know something I don't know. In other upgrades, I've encountered some packages which were 'split' into two or more new packages. Since I just told it to replace existing packages, and then add the minimum of new packages to resolve dependencies, will I have a complete system? Is there some list somewhere of 'split' packages, so I will know which packages I have to install to get back the full functionality I had? How about 'renamed' packages? Are there any packages which contain the same programs, but which go by different names between 6.4 and 7.1? Will I have to manually uninstall the old and install the new ones?
-- Rick Green
"I have the heart of a little child, and the brain of a genius. ... and I keep them in a jar under my bed"
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001, Konstantin (Kastus) Shchuka wrote:
I learned the hard way that the best way to upgrade is clean install.
I tried to upgrade 7.0 to 7.1. The net result is X server which does not start, yast2 does not start, a lot of packages missing files. Finally, after a lost day of work I did a clean install. My /home was on a separate partition, and I saved my /etc from 7.0 before doing clean install.
It looks like we are back to Slackware circa 1995 when a new realease of distribution meant a clean install.
This is in considerable distinction from Slackware circa 2001, where tools like autoslack and slackUp have allowed me to smoothly and almost automatically upgrade my Slack machines from 4.0 to 7.0 to 7.1 to current-as-of-yesterday (literally!) which is not-quite-7.2-yet (Slack keeps their /current directory, well, "current" --eventually they'll freeze it, call it "7.2", and start a new /current) However, like you, after a week wrestling with a SuSE 7.0 to 7.1 upgrade on one machine and encountering a variety of package, file, and daemon-related glitches, and having to symlink various libraries by hand, etc., I'm beginning to agree that the backup, wipe, and clean install approach may be the only really good solution for upgrading from SuSE 7.0 to 7.1. But if I end up having to go through the work of a clean install, it may as well be of an easier to upgrade distro like (gulp) Slack. Best wishes, --Kevin
RPM and YaST supposed upgradeability of the system. But now the difference even between the releases within one major version number appear to be too big.
-Kastus
I've come to the same conclusion. I always to a clean install. I do not consider this a step backwards to 1995. The changes that have taken place during the last two years in the xserver, the libraries, the desktops and many, many auxillary applications have been nothing short of ASTOUNDING! So many things chaning all at once. It is amazing to me that things work as well as they do. For example, KDE has come from nowhere to a potential WinXX killer in just 3 years. It took M$ 15 years to produce Win98SE and it still is junk. KDE2 is much more stable than my Win2000 Pro workstation at work. My W2KP crashed within minutes after it's first install and twice on the same day of it's second install. In the weeks since then I've lost count of the times it has crashed or rebooted on its own. That''s not to say that W2K is all bad.... it is more stable than Win98 or Win95 by as much as KDE2 is more stable than W2K, which is a lot. I am stay with SuSE and Linux because that is where the future is. The paradigm shift is already happening and M$'s moves to squeeze more money out of what they think are trapped users will only hasten their demise. Linus said recently that Linux will dominate the desktop within 5 years. With the progress that KDE is making, the ease of development using KDevelop, glade, Kylix and other tools, I am going to be optimistic and say three years. In the meantime there will be bumpy spots. I'm hitting one right now with my IDE PleXWriter 4/8/32. I wish now that I had spec'd it out as a scsi device, and my zip250 too. Device drivers is still a sore point with many devices, but we have a lot more now than we did 3 years ago. And, IBM's multi-billion dollar investment in Linux will produce a LOT of trickle down. GNOME may have hit on hardtimes with Eazel downsizing. We'll have to see how well the consortium pitches in with $$$ to help out. I'm not optimistic about them, considering how well they helped CDE. JLK On Saturday 31 March 2001 01:39, Konstantin (Kastus) Shchuka wrote:
I learned the hard way that the best way to upgrade is clean install.
I tried to upgrade 7.0 to 7.1. The net result is X server which does not start, yast2 does not start, a lot of packages missing files. Finally, after a lost day of work I did a clean install. My /home was on a separate partition, and I saved my /etc from 7.0 before doing clean install.
It looks like we are back to Slackware circa 1995 when a new realease of distribution meant a clean install. RPM and YaST supposed upgradeability of the system. But now the difference even between the releases within one major version number appear to be too big.
-Kastus
On Sat, Mar 31, 2001 at 01:54:41AM -0500, Rick Green wrote:
I'm in the process of doing an upgrade from 6.4 to 7.1. yast2 presented me with three packages which had *lower* version numbers on the 7.1 distribution, than I had loaded from the 6.4 distribution. I told it to go ahead and replace the packages anyway, figuring that you must know something I don't know. In other upgrades, I've encountered some packages which were 'split' into two or more new packages. Since I just told it to replace existing packages, and then add the minimum of new packages to resolve dependencies, will I have a complete system? Is there some list somewhere of 'split' packages, so I will know which packages I have to install to get back the full functionality I had? How about 'renamed' packages? Are there any packages which contain the same programs, but which go by different names between 6.4 and 7.1? Will I have to manually uninstall the old and install the new ones?
-- Rick Green
"I have the heart of a little child, and the brain of a genius. ... and I keep them in a jar under my bed"
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq
On Saturday 31 March 2001 11:19, you wrote:
I've come to the same conclusion. I always to a clean install.
I do not consider this a step backwards to 1995.
The changes that have taken place during the last two years in the xserver, the libraries, the desktops and many, many auxillary applications have been nothing short of ASTOUNDING! So many things chaning all at once. It is amazing to me that things work as well as they do. For example, KDE has come from nowhere to a potential WinXX killer in just 3 years. It took M$ 15 years to produce Win98SE and it still is junk. KDE2 is much more stable than my Win2000 Pro workstation at work.
Jerry and I have sent quite a few Kword and Killustrator docs to each other by e-mail. Many of theses docs have embedded pictures and drawings (Killustrator). Mind you that Koffice has only been out for about 6 months and it's performance is (arguably) as good as Word 97. It appears Kword docs are automatically gunzipped for e-mail transport. These features really indicate that open source Linux produces better software. -- Cheers, Jonathan
Hi, That's why a /home independant partition is appreciated ! Let us remember that SuSE 7.1 distribution must work with the 2.2.18 and 2.4 kernel. As SuSE had to include 2.4 ( already promised in 7.0) , I think it was a rush at that time to put everything together. Anyway, mostly, 7.1 works fine and I didn't experiment a major problem the first time upgrading from 7.0 to 7.1. As home users we always want the latest and the best !!!! So my approach was to test 2.4 in the beginning, with unsatisfied results. Then 2.4.2 from kernel.org was released and decided to go for it. etc...... Finaly, I removed 2.2.18 and only have 2.4.2 I still consider 7.0 and 7.1 as a "kernel" transition. We should help SuSE by giving them all bad or good feedback so they can make a rock solid distro. Still speaking as home user, "the harder way we learn, the better we understand". But there should be a limit!!!! Have fun with 7.1 Filip. Le Samedi 31 Mars 2001 09:39, vous avez écrit :
I learned the hard way that the best way to upgrade is clean install.
I tried to upgrade 7.0 to 7.1. The net result is X server which does not start, yast2 does not start, a lot of packages missing files. Finally, after a lost day of work I did a clean install. My /home was on a separate partition, and I saved my /etc from 7.0 before doing clean install.
It looks like we are back to Slackware circa 1995 when a new realease of distribution meant a clean install. RPM and YaST supposed upgradeability of the system. But now the difference even between the releases within one major version number appear to be too big.
-Kastus
On Sat, Mar 31, 2001 at 01:54:41AM -0500, Rick Green wrote:
I'm in the process of doing an upgrade from 6.4 to 7.1. yast2 presented me with three packages which had *lower* version numbers on the 7.1 distribution, than I had loaded from the 6.4 distribution. I told it to go ahead and replace the packages anyway, figuring that you must know something I don't know. In other upgrades, I've encountered some packages which were 'split' into two or more new packages. Since I just told it to replace existing packages, and then add the minimum of new packages to resolve dependencies, will I have a complete system? Is there some list somewhere of 'split' packages, so I will know which packages I have to install to get back the full functionality I had? How about 'renamed' packages? Are there any packages which contain the same programs, but which go by different names between 6.4 and 7.1? Will I have to manually uninstall the old and install the new ones?
-- Rick Green
"I have the heart of a little child, and the brain of a genius. ... and I keep them in a jar under my bed"
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq
On Sat, Mar 31, 2001 at 08:06:58PM +0200, filip wrote:
Hi,
That's why a /home independant partition is appreciated ! Let us remember that SuSE 7.1 distribution must work with the 2.2.18 and 2.4 kernel. As SuSE had to include 2.4 ( already promised in 7.0) , I think it was a rush at that time to put everything together. Anyway, mostly, 7.1 works fine and I didn't experiment a major problem the first time upgrading from 7.0 to 7.1. As home users we always want the latest and the best !!!! So my approach was to test 2.4 in the beginning, with unsatisfied results. Then 2.4.2 from kernel.org was released and decided to go for it. etc...... Finaly, I removed 2.2.18 and only have 2.4.2 I still consider 7.0 and 7.1 as a "kernel" transition. We should help SuSE by
The biggest transition is not kernel, but libc, which is finally 2.2 now. -Kastus
giving them all bad or good feedback so they can make a rock solid distro. Still speaking as home user, "the harder way we learn, the better we understand". But there should be a limit!!!! Have fun with 7.1 Filip.
Le Samedi 31 Mars 2001 09:39, vous avez ?crit :
I learned the hard way that the best way to upgrade is clean install.
I tried to upgrade 7.0 to 7.1. The net result is X server which does not start, yast2 does not start, a lot of packages missing files. Finally, after a lost day of work I did a clean install. My /home was on a separate partition, and I saved my /etc from 7.0 before doing clean install.
It looks like we are back to Slackware circa 1995 when a new realease of distribution meant a clean install. RPM and YaST supposed upgradeability of the system. But now the difference even between the releases within one major version number appear to be too big.
-Kastus
On Sat, Mar 31, 2001 at 01:54:41AM -0500, Rick Green wrote:
I'm in the process of doing an upgrade from 6.4 to 7.1. yast2 presented me with three packages which had *lower* version numbers on the 7.1 distribution, than I had loaded from the 6.4 distribution. I told it to go ahead and replace the packages anyway, figuring that you must know something I don't know. In other upgrades, I've encountered some packages which were 'split' into two or more new packages. Since I just told it to replace existing packages, and then add the minimum of new packages to resolve dependencies, will I have a complete system? Is there some list somewhere of 'split' packages, so I will know which packages I have to install to get back the full functionality I had? How about 'renamed' packages? Are there any packages which contain the same programs, but which go by different names between 6.4 and 7.1? Will I have to manually uninstall the old and install the new ones?
-- Rick Green
"I have the heart of a little child, and the brain of a genius. ... and I keep them in a jar under my bed"
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq
-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq
participants (6)
-
filip -
Jerry Kreps -
Jonathan Drews -
klcroxen -
Konstantin (Kastus) Shchuka -
Rick Green