Proper sources list from Jessie > Stretch

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
11 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Proper sources list from Jessie > Stretch

Fjfj109
Hi - wondering if with a standard sources list in Jessie (or any stable):

deb  http://deb.debian.org/debian jessie main
deb-src  http://deb.debian.org/debian jessie main

deb  http://deb.debian.org/debian jessie-updates main
deb-src  http://deb.debian.org/debian jessie-updates main

deb http://security.debian.org/ jessie/updates main
deb-src http://security.debian.org/ jessie/updates main
Whether it's enough to simply change jessie to stretch (or testing, or sid/unstable, whatever) and everything is fine?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proper sources list from Jessie > Stretch

Dejan Jocic
On 01-06-17, Fjfj109 wrote:

> Hi - wondering if with a standard sources list in Jessie (or any stable):
>
> deb
> http://deb.debian.org/debian
> jessie main
> deb-src
> http://deb.debian.org/debian
> jessie main
>
> deb
> http://deb.debian.org/debian
> jessie-updates main
> deb-src
> http://deb.debian.org/debian
> jessie-updates main
>
> deb
> http://security.debian.org/
> jessie/updates main
> deb-src
> http://security.debian.org/
> jessie/updates main
>
> Whether it's enough to simply change jessie to stretch (or testing, or sid/unstable, whatever) and everything is fine?

It is usually enough to change it to stretch, if you follow it up with
all those update and upgrade commands. And read release documentation.
But it is not good to go from stable directly to unstable. If you want
to go to unstable, you first go to testing. Then, when you are sure that
everything went fine, you switch to unstable. And, you make backup of
your important data. Just in case.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proper sources list from Jessie > Stretch

Dan Ritter-4
On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 09:19:29AM +0200, Dejan Jocic wrote:
> On 01-06-17, Fjfj109 wrote:
> > Hi - wondering if with a standard sources list in Jessie (or any stable):

> It is usually enough to change it to stretch, if you follow it up with
> all those update and upgrade commands. And read release documentation.
> But it is not good to go from stable directly to unstable. If you want
> to go to unstable, you first go to testing. Then, when you are sure that
> everything went fine, you switch to unstable. And, you make backup of
> your important data. Just in case.

This is odd advice. (Not the bit about backups. Backups are
always important.)

Stretch will become the new stable in a few weeks.  Changing
to "stretch" will make that transition early, but changing to
"unstable" will make that transition and then, after stretch
becomes stable, will incur a lot of package churn and breakage.

If this discussion happened a year ago, the question would be
whether you really wanted to go to testing or to unstable. They
have different purposes.

-dsr-

-dsr-

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proper sources list from Jessie > Stretch

Fungi4All
Sorry for the top-post but I think it is appropriate

all good advice below but returning on the initial question without advice,
sid/unstable does not have a security.debian.repository
so just the two deb.debian are enough.

For someone with an urge to try the latest and finest you can go to sid
now and then revert to testing and brace for the tsunami.

But read this example as a sample:
Arch Linux Security Advisory ASA-201705-22
Severity: High
Date : 2017-05-30
CVE-ID : CVE-2017-7494
Package : samba
Type : arbitrary code execution
Remote : Yes
The package samba before version 4.5.10-1 is vulnerable to arbitrary
code execution.
================================
The version of Jessie is still 4.2....  stretch and sid are on 4.5.8.... in arch based distros 4.5.10 is what they call stable!!  This does not mean that 4.2 may not already be patched due to this security issue on jessie.
This is one package as an example.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Proper sources list from Jessie > Stretch
Local Time: June 1, 2017 2:28 PM
UTC Time: June 1, 2017 11:28 AM
To: Dejan Jocic <[hidden email]>

On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 09:19:29AM +0200, Dejan Jocic wrote:
> On 01-06-17, Fjfj109 wrote:
> > Hi - wondering if with a standard sources list in Jessie (or any stable):

> It is usually enough to change it to stretch, if you follow it up with
> all those update and upgrade commands. And read release documentation.
> But it is not good to go from stable directly to unstable. If you want
> to go to unstable, you first go to testing. Then, when you are sure that
> everything went fine, you switch to unstable. And, you make backup of
> your important data. Just in case.

This is odd advice. (Not the bit about backups. Backups are
always important.)

Stretch will become the new stable in a few weeks. Changing
to "stretch" will make that transition early, but changing to
"unstable" will make that transition and then, after stretch
becomes stable, will incur a lot of package churn and breakage.

If this discussion happened a year ago, the question would be
whether you really wanted to go to testing or to unstable. They
have different purposes.

-dsr-

-dsr-


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proper sources list from Jessie > Stretch

Ric Moore
On 06/02/2017 10:41 AM, Fungi4All wrote:
> Sorry for the top-post but I think it is appropriate

It is not ever appropriate, no matter what you think. Ric


--
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
http://linuxcounter.net/user/44256.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proper sources list from Jessie > Stretch

Lisi Reisz
On Sunday 04 June 2017 00:27:06 Ric Moore wrote:
> On 06/02/2017 10:41 AM, Fungi4All wrote:
> > Sorry for the top-post but I think it is appropriate
>
> It is not ever appropriate, no matter what you think. Ric

+1

Lisi

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proper sources list from Jessie > Stretch

Darac Marjal-2
In reply to this post by Ric Moore
On Sat, Jun 03, 2017 at 07:27:06PM -0400, Ric Moore wrote:
>On 06/02/2017 10:41 AM, Fungi4All wrote:
>>Sorry for the top-post but I think it is appropriate
>
>It is not ever appropriate, no matter what you think. Ric

I disagree. I think that top-posting is MOST appropriate when forwarding
a message. If I forward a message, I am sending it to someone who wasn't
previously part of the conversation, therefore it makes sense to preface
the message with a short introduction ("Please take a look at the
following and respond to John for me" or "John sent me this, I thought
you might enjoy it"). It gives the message some context. If you
bottom-post or interleave-post a forwarded message, then the recipient
starts reading a message which is not addressed to them and which may
make no sense without your comment.

In short, top-post for forwarded messages, no top-posting for replies.


--
For more information, please reread.

signature.asc (923 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proper sources list from Jessie > Stretch

Siard
In reply to this post by Ric Moore
Ric Moore:
> Fungi4All:
> > Sorry for the top-post but I think it is appropriate
>
> It is not ever appropriate, no matter what you think. Ric

I do not quite agree. Bottom posting and top posting are different
styles of responding; choosing between them depends on your purpose.

Especially in a corporate environment, the previous correspondence is
usually not meant to be read first, but rather meant as a reference.
That's why top posting is usually preferable there.

In a technical list like this one, bottom posting is obviously by far
the best method - although exceptions do exist, e.g. when for some
reason it is desirable that the reply is being read first.
What you *think*, your intuition, is usually a good indication for that.
Maybe better not let it overrule by rigid rules....?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proper sources list from Jessie > Stretch

rhkramer
On Monday, June 05, 2017 07:19:40 AM Siard wrote:

> Ric Moore:
> > Fungi4All:
> > > Sorry for the top-post but I think it is appropriate
> >
> > It is not ever appropriate, no matter what you think. Ric
>
> I do not quite agree. Bottom posting and top posting are different
> styles of responding; choosing between them depends on your purpose.
>
> Especially in a corporate environment, the previous correspondence is
> usually not meant to be read first, but rather meant as a reference.
> That's why top posting is usually preferable there.
>
> In a technical list like this one, bottom posting is obviously by far
> the best method - although exceptions do exist, e.g. when for some
> reason it is desirable that the reply is being read first.
> What you *think*, your intuition, is usually a good indication for that.
> Maybe better not let it overrule by rigid rules....?

+1

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proper sources list from Jessie > Stretch

Joe Rowan
In reply to this post by Siard
On Mon, 5 Jun 2017 13:19:40 +0200
Siard <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Ric Moore:
> > Fungi4All:  
> > > Sorry for the top-post but I think it is appropriate  
> >
> > It is not ever appropriate, no matter what you think. Ric  
>
> I do not quite agree. Bottom posting and top posting are different
> styles of responding; choosing between them depends on your purpose.
>
> Especially in a corporate environment, the previous correspondence is
> usually not meant to be read first, but rather meant as a reference.
> That's why top posting is usually preferable there.
>
> In a technical list like this one, bottom posting is obviously by far
> the best method - although exceptions do exist, e.g. when for some
> reason it is desirable that the reply is being read first.



> What you *think*, your intuition, is usually a good indication for
> that. Maybe better not let it overrule by rigid rules....?
>

Indeed. 'Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is
right.'

Rules were *not* made to be broken, but they should be taken as
guidance rather than being unquestioningly obeyed. I'll damn well use a
goto if I want to...

--
Joe

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Proper sources list from Jessie > Stretch

Greg Wooledge
In reply to this post by Siard
On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 01:19:40PM +0200, Siard wrote:
> I do not quite agree. Bottom posting and top posting are different
> styles of responding; choosing between them depends on your purpose.

Regardless of this, the messages from that funguy person are unreadable.
It looks like he's using Microsoft Outlook.  The quoted sections are not
visibly distinct from the new text, and he uses long lines.  It's just
an unstructured wall of text.

So, the result is that I often delete his messages without making much
attempt to read them.  If I have to spend more than 2 seconds trying
to figure out which part of the text is even HIS, rather than someone
else's, it's simply not worth my time and energy.