Prev: Bogus "Unable to mount" error dialog
Next: Csoft
From: D.M. Procida on 3 May 2010 17:13
Bruce Stephens <bruce+usenet(a)cenderis.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) writes:
>
> [...]
>
> > deb http://www.backports.org/debian squeeze-backports main
> > contrib non-free
>
> I don't think that exists.
>
> [...]
>
> > # apt-get -t squeeze-backports install mercurial
>
> Which would explain that.

Thanks, using lenny-backports did work.

Daniele
From: Tony Houghton on 3 May 2010 17:36
In <1jhxmrq.1lf99fuyyrdojN%real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk>,
D.M. Procida <real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk> wrote:

> If I have Debian Etch installed, can I upgrade this so that it becomes,
> in effect, Debian Lenny?
>
> As far as I understand the way it works, if in /etc/apt/sources.list I
> have:
>
> deb http://debian.virginmedia.com/ lenny main contrib non-free
> deb-src http://debian.virginmedia.com/ lenny main contrib non-free
>
> then in effect I have told the system that it should get whatever
> updates belong to the Lenny distribution.
>
> But if I wanted to upgrade to Squeeze - which might not be a good idea
> anyway - I should just change the above lines approrpiately.
>
> Is that correct?

I don't know if you can go straight from etch to squeeze, you might have
to go through lenny first. This was mentioned in another thread quite
recently (which started off about Ubuntu, but someone said it applies to
Debian too).

--
TH * http://www.realh.co.uk
From: Tony Houghton on 3 May 2010 17:50
In <1jhxqbk.g9jfvf1mt4yahN%real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk>,
D.M. Procida <real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk> wrote:

> I'm on Mercurial version 1.0.1.
>
> # hg --version
> Mercurial Distributed SCM (version 1.0.1)
>
> I'd like to get to a newer version. Version 1.5.2 is in squeeze:
> <http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/mercurial>

Do you mean 1.5.1-2? The biggest difficulty in getting that to work in
etch is that it requires python >= 2.5 (although I don't know whether it
uses python 2.5 features or that's just the earliest version debian now
supports). If you're worried about using a non-stable distribution,
AFAICT from comparing mercurial's dependencies to what
packages.debian.org says is available in lenny, you should be able to
upgrade just to lenny then install squeeze's mercurial and
mercurial-common packages.

--
TH * http://www.realh.co.uk
From: Richard Kettlewell on 4 May 2010 05:21
real-not-anti-spam-address(a)apple-juice.co.uk (D.M. Procida) writes:

> If I have Debian Etch installed, can I upgrade this so that it becomes,
> in effect, Debian Lenny?
>
> As far as I understand the way it works, if in /etc/apt/sources.list I
> have:
>
> deb http://debian.virginmedia.com/ lenny main contrib non-free
> deb-src http://debian.virginmedia.com/ lenny main contrib non-free
>
> then in effect I have told the system that it should get whatever
> updates belong to the Lenny distribution.

Best to have a look at the upgrade documentation:

http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html

(or start at http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/releasenotes if
you're not using x86.)

> But if I wanted to upgrade to Squeeze - which might not be a good idea
> anyway - I should just change the above lines approrpiately.
>
> Is that correct?

In principle yes, but:
(i) The caveats in the etch->lenny upgrade notes will probably still
apply.
(ii) There may be more such caveats which would appear in a future
lenny->squeeze upgrade process.
(iii) etch->squeeze is, even when squeeze is released, unlikely to have
been tested anywhere near as much as lenny->squeeze.

--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
From: alexd on 12 May 2010 15:32
On 03/05/10 21:38, D.M. Procida wrote:

> # apt-get -t squeeze-backports install mercurial
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tree
> Reading state information... Done
> mercurial is already the newest version.
> 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 4 not upgraded.

For future reference, 'apt-cache policy packagename' should show you
what it thinks about the given package.

--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEsNpEaTm(a)ale.cx)
20:30:16 up 14 days, 20:09, 2 users, load average: 0.14, 0.30, 0.30
It is better to have been wasted and then sober
than to never have been wasted at all
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Bogus "Unable to mount" error dialog
Next: Csoft