Debian “wheezy” Released

News and announcements regarding Debian and the forum. Not for support questions.

Re: Debian “wheezy” Released

Postby confuseling » 2013-05-07 13:05

stevesr0 wrote:If one upgrades from Squeeze, do any packages from the squeeze backports repository have to be downgraded to versions from Squeeze (or removed), or can one just "#" the backport repositories and then upgrade as described in the install notes for Wheezy upgrade from Squeeze?

The installation notes just say to avoid "unofficial" backport versions, but I though the Squeeze-backports were official.

Steve


That's an interesting question. But I thought Backports became official with Wheezy? Edit - nope, looks like you're right... http://www.debian.org/News/2010/20100905
Personally, I'd be inclined to remove anything that isn't needed - it's all going to have been tested less anyway.
The Forum's search box is terrible. Use site specific search, e.g.
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3A ... terms+here
confuseling
 
Posts: 2144
Joined: 2009-10-21 01:03

Re: Debian “wheezy” Released

Postby magullo » 2013-05-07 13:39

stevesr0 wrote:If one upgrades from Squeeze, do any packages from the squeeze backports repository have to be downgraded to versions from Squeeze (or removed), or can one just "#" the backport repositories and then upgrade as described in the install notes for Wheezy upgrade from Squeeze?

The installation notes just say to avoid "unofficial" backport versions, but I though the Squeeze-backports were official.

Steve


As far as I tryed, you'd better remove backports before upgrading, if you can. I upgraded from lenny to squeeze with a few backports installed, and had to fix package by package after.
Maybe things are better now, but I'm removing iceweasel backports before upgrade (only backport installed).
magullo
 
Posts: 6
Joined: 2013-01-28 13:19

Re: Debian “wheezy” Released

Postby stevesr0 » 2013-05-07 15:46

re: removing installed packages from backports -

I just checked and I have roughly 98 packages from bpo60.

1 (firmware-linux-nonfree) is version 0.36+wheezy0.1~bpo60+1
20 are from ~bpo60+2 and are all related to LibreOffice version 3.5.4

The other 77 are from~bpo60+1 and include the running kernel (3.2.41-2~bpo60+1, matching header and base, initramfs-tools, X11 related packages, iceweasel and related packages, video drm packages, libcairo, libvpx1 and libsqlite3-0.

If all of these have to be downgraded to Squeeze packages in order to upgrade, I would be inclined to just do a fresh install of Wheezy.

Anyone else have a similar situation?
Should this question be posted (or linked) on one of the Help forums?

Thanks in advance.
stevesr0
 
Posts: 156
Joined: 2012-05-05 03:32

Re: Debian “wheezy” Released

Postby beardedragon » 2013-05-07 18:23

Not sure what I did? Net installed Debian Wheezy on whole disk and once installed decided to add some things. Using aptitude, suddenly half of the already installed programs are removed. Looked at what was left, installed google chrome, xfce, xfce-goodies, libreoffice, icedove and xsane. Added cairo-dock and desktopnova and back up and running. The only thing missing now is the icon for the network in the notification area. Still online as before.
Robert Collard, Madison, WI
HP s5710f 3G RAM  ATI [Radion HD 3000]
Debian 7.4 XFCE-4.8 3.2.0-4-amd64
Manjaro 0.8.8 XFCE-4.10 3.10.28-1 x86_64
User avatar
beardedragon
 
Posts: 157
Joined: 2011-06-08 21:18

Re: Debian “wheezy” Released

Postby kc1di » 2013-05-07 18:44

Wheezy 7.0 best Debian install yet everything went just great here. Thanks to all the Dev's.
:D :)
Dave
Morse Code -An Early digital mode !
Jessie
John 3:16
Registered Linux User # 462608
User avatar
kc1di
 
Posts: 207
Joined: 2007-03-12 12:52
Location: Somewhere In Maine

Re: Debian “wheezy” Released

Postby emariz » 2013-05-07 21:06

stevesr0 wrote:I just checked and I have roughly 98 packages from bpo60.

This search pattern lists all installed packages from the Backports repository:
Code: Select all
$ aptitude search '?installed ?origin(Debian Backports)'


And this one will also include installed backports from other repositories (like the Debian Mozilla Team and Deb Multimedia):
Code: Select all
$ aptitude search '?narrow(?installed, ?archive(squeeze-backports))'



stevesr0 wrote:If all of these have to be downgraded to Squeeze packages in order to upgrade, I would be inclined to just do a fresh install of Wheezy.

You do not need to downgrade anything, because the version of those packages in Wheezy is most likely higher than its counterpart in Squeeze-Backports. Third-party repositories may cause more trouble, but Backports is carefully managed, precisely to prevent these issues.
emariz
 
Posts: 2887
Joined: 2008-10-17 07:59

Re: Debian “wheezy” Released

Postby goofygutt » 2013-05-08 04:23

Updated without problems :) Not so happy about Gnome 3 tough, perhaps it will grow on me.
goofygutt
 
Posts: 3
Joined: 2013-05-05 01:24

Re: Debian “wheezy” Released

Postby stevesr0 » 2013-05-08 04:29

Thanks again emariz (and other responders).

I plan to upgrade this computer to Wheezy because it is a secondary computer, but I am more comfortable doing it slowly, a step at a time.

The info about checking the sources.list that is given in Appendix A. is not completely clear to me, and I suspect to others. Therefore, I am presenting my sources.list for discussion and advice.
(OBVIOUSLY, I haven't added the wheezy repositories that I would use for the upgrade. I plan to do that after clarifying which of the existing repositories should or shouldn't be disabled.)

Here is a copy of my /etc/apt/sources.list file:

# deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux testing _Squeeze_ - Official Snapshot i386 NETINST Binary-1 20100919-21:00]/ squeeze main
deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ squeeze main
deb http://security.debian.org/ squeeze/updates main
deb-src http://security.debian.org/ squeeze/updates main
# deb http://download.skype.com/linux/repos/debian/ stable non-free
deb http://www.deb-multimedia.org/ squeeze main non-free
deb http://mirror.home-dn.net/debian-multimedia/ squeeze main
deb http://download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/debian/ squeeze contrib non-free
# deb http://dl.google.com/linux/deb/ stable non-free
# deb http://backports.debian.org/debian-backports/ squeeze-backports main contrib non-free
# deb http://deb.opera.com/opera/ squeeze non-free
deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ squeeze main contrib non-free
deb http://www.deb-multimedia.org/ squeeze-backports main
deb http://mozilla.debian.net/ squeeze-backports iceweasel-release
------------------------------------

1. I assume that a repository that has been disabled by placing a # in front (as shown above) will be ignored in an upgrade to wheezy (so I don't have to delete the line in the file)?

2. The cdrom repository has been disabled since I completed the initial install of Squeeze, as I have only used online sources since then. Since I am not planning to use a Wheezy cd for the upgrade, is there any reason to enable this line? (I ask this only because Appendix A makes a point about not editing the cdrom line.)

3. I have no desire to upgrade virtualbox, skype, chrome or opera at this time, so I plan to keep their repositories disabled.

4. The backport repositories: If I set preferences to upgrade to the wheezy repository, rather than to the highest version, would it be better to leave the backport repositories enabled or disabled?

5. The other repositories that I question disabling are all the three multimedia repositories and mozilla.debian.net. Is it OK to leave these disabled and add multimedia afterwards or is this likely to break the upgrade and the system for some reason?

6. Unless corrected by others answers to 1-5, I believe this is what a minimal sources.list for the upgrade from squeeze to wheezy might look like:

# deb cdrom:[Debian GNU/Linux testing _Squeeze_ - Official Snapshot i386 NETINST Binary-1 20100919-21:00]/ squeeze main
deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ wheezy main
deb http://security.debian.org/ wheezy/updates main
deb-src http://security.debian.org/ wheezy/updates main
# deb http://download.skype.com/linux/repos/debian/ stable non-free
# deb http://www.deb-multimedia.org/ squeeze main non-free
# deb http://mirror.home-dn.net/debian-multimedia/ squeeze main
# deb http://download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/debian/ squeeze contrib non-free
# deb http://dl.google.com/linux/deb/ stable non-free
# deb http://backports.debian.org/debian-backports/ squeeze-backports main contrib non-free
# deb http://deb.opera.com/opera/ squeeze non-free
deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ wheezy main contrib non-free
# deb http://www.deb-multimedia.org/ squeeze-backports main
# deb http://mozilla.debian.net/ squeeze-backports iceweasel-release
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As always, thanks in advance for comments.
stevesr0
 
Posts: 156
Joined: 2012-05-05 03:32

Re: Debian “wheezy” Released

Postby emariz » 2013-05-08 05:52

stevesr0 wrote:The info about checking the sources.list that is given in Appendix A. is not completely clear to me, and I suspect to others. Therefore, I am presenting my sources.list for discussion and advice.

Do you know why Debian releases are supported for one year after the publication of a new release? So that you have full twelve months to plan a successful migration. Relax, read, learn, try, and then do. It has only been two days.


My opinion:

You were using Squeeze, an archive with N number of packages at version S. The Wheezy archive has X number of packages at version W>=S. Because the package manager cannot downgrade packages by default and W>=S, the package manager will (try to) upgrade all installed Squeeze packages that are also available in the Wheezy archive, and list as obsolete those that are no longer available.

When one starts using third-party repositories, the comparison is more complex. Most, if not all, packages in Squeeze-Backports are at a lower version than in Wheezy, say B | W>B>S. But many packages in Deb Multimedia and Deb Multimedia Backports may be at the same or a higher version than Wheezy and have different dependencies. And the packages in Debian Mozilla may be many versions newer than those in Wheezy, but depend on packages only available in Squeeze or Squeeze-Backports.

First, one has to look for third-party repositories that are Wheezy-compatible. If there are but one does not enable them during the upgrade, many packages will be replaced, others will remain at their current version and be marked as obsolete, and some others will simply break. If one does enable these third-party repositories, APT may still face issues, but it certainly will have more tools.

Do the upgrade in parts, it will be extremely simpler to diagnose the problems. In fact, I would start with the packages from third-party repositories.
emariz
 
Posts: 2887
Joined: 2008-10-17 07:59

Re: Debian “wheezy” Released

Postby kc1di » 2013-05-08 11:20

goofygutt wrote:Updated without problems :) Not so happy about Gnome 3 tough, perhaps it will grow on me.

I tried Gnome 3 for awhile but decided to go with xfce :)
Dave
Morse Code -An Early digital mode !
Jessie
John 3:16
Registered Linux User # 462608
User avatar
kc1di
 
Posts: 207
Joined: 2007-03-12 12:52
Location: Somewhere In Maine

Re: Debian “wheezy” Released

Postby w2vy » 2013-05-08 11:58

emariz wrote:Do the upgrade in parts, it will be extremely simpler to diagnose the problems. In fact, I would start with the packages from third-party repositories.


That sounds good... is there a wiki page that describes the steps for the some-what smart but cautious admin?

You suggested doing the third party packages first, I have skype, dropbox and googletalk
And those sources just list debian with no referenced to the release, so is it reasonable to assume they
are not very release specific or they handle it properly automatically?

I also have one launchpad source that I seem to have gotten a java7 release from, I am inclined to just uninstall that package
and remove the source.

The rest are all debian.org urls

Here's another (likely) common one http://mozilla.debian.net/ squeeze-backports iceweasel-release

any suggestion would be nice.

debian is so stable we don't have new releases that often... it is a Blessing and a Curse...
The Blessing is obvious... the curse is we all forget how to do the slightly non-standard stuff

tom
w2vy
 
Posts: 44
Joined: 2011-02-07 14:06

Re: Debian “wheezy” Released

Postby emariz » 2013-05-08 20:20

w2vy wrote:You suggested doing the third party packages first, I have skype, dropbox and googletalk
And those sources just list debian with no referenced to the release, so is it reasonable to assume they
are not very release specific or they handle it properly automatically?

I also have one launchpad source that I seem to have gotten a java7 release from, I am inclined to just uninstall that package and remove the source.

I would start with third-party repositories because those are precisely the packages that APT may have more problems dealing with. The key part here is to know if the third-party repositories are compatible with Wheezy. Backports, Debian Mozilla and Deb Multimedia provide Wheezy archives, but you will have to read about the others.
I would remove all PPA's, but I do not use them and have no experience managing them.

Review your APT Preferences, add the Wheezy and Wheezy-compatible third-party repositories to your sources list, and leave the Squeeze ones enabled.
Are you familiar with Aptitude's visual mode? As you will be upgrading your system in parts and keeping and eye on the process, there is no need to use Apt-Get (which is more conservative.)

Read the release notes and the installation guide, and always simulate the actions before proceeding, or run Aptitude's visual mode as a normal user first.

Start with, say, the packages from Skype, then Googletalk, then those from Mozilla, and lastly those from Deb Multimedia, which may be the most complicate and the ones that require more interaction.
Once the packages from third-party repositories have been solved (upgraded, removed or put on hold, according to the issues), start upgrading the system: Kernel and firmware first, restart, then the X Server, then the core packages of the desktop environment, then the accessories and multimedia applications, then the office suite, etc. At the end simulate aptitude safe-upgrade and aptitude full-upgrade to update all packages that are still at their version from Squeeze and choose the best options for you.
After the upgrade, reinstall the missing packages, remove the obsolete ones, and remove any Squeeze-related repositories from your sources list.
Last edited by emariz on 2013-05-10 03:39, edited 1 time in total.
emariz
 
Posts: 2887
Joined: 2008-10-17 07:59

Re: Debian “wheezy” Released

Postby Randicus » 2013-05-09 11:54

Yes, Wheezy has been released. Now it is time for a rant (sort of :) ).
I installed Squeeze on a new computer and upgraded to Wheezy. Everything worked perfectly, except my printer no longer printed. After a few days of futile trouble-shooting, I experimented by re-installing with a Wheezy disc. Then all Hell broke loose.
1 - My printer still does not work.
2 - I no longer have transparency.
3 - My Openbox startup.sh is ignored.
4 - fbpanel will not open on its own.
:evil: {Insert explitive here.} :evil:
I have some rough times ahead. :(
Damn, I need a coffee right now.
Randicus
 
Posts: 2664
Joined: 2011-05-08 09:11

Re: Debian “wheezy” Released

Postby beardedragon » 2013-05-10 01:00

beardedragon wrote:Not sure what I did? Net installed Debian Wheezy on whole disk and once installed decided to add some things. Using aptitude, suddenly half of the already installed programs are removed. Looked at what was left, installed google chrome, xfce, xfce-goodies, libreoffice, icedove and xsane. Added cairo-dock and desktopnova and back up and running. The only thing missing now is the icon for the network in the notification area. Still online as before.


Seems like everything went haywire, so I reinstalled using Net-Install and got it to take the Desktop Xfce. Success. After working through a couple of problems, using Google Chrome to take advantage of Flash and finding a solution for libdvdcss2 in VLC I am very happy with this version.
Robert Collard, Madison, WI
HP s5710f 3G RAM  ATI [Radion HD 3000]
Debian 7.4 XFCE-4.8 3.2.0-4-amd64
Manjaro 0.8.8 XFCE-4.10 3.10.28-1 x86_64
User avatar
beardedragon
 
Posts: 157
Joined: 2011-06-08 21:18

Re: Debian “wheezy” Released

Postby jackdaws » 2013-05-11 15:35

Great job! Congratulations and thanks to all concerned. I've been using Wheezy for something approaching a few years now, and it's very stable and functional on my system.
Perfectionism is an imperfection
User avatar
jackdaws
 
Posts: 150
Joined: 2006-04-17 16:01
Location: The Glens of Antrim

PreviousNext

Return to News & Announcements

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

fashionable