On (16/05/05 22:03), Mankuthimma wrote: > > At the risk of being contrary, I recently (January) upgraded a couple of > > servers from woody to sarge and it was pretty trivial - in fact I don't > > recall having to do any reconfiguration other than answer some questions > > during the upgrade. > > > > Given the supposed strength of Debian is that it makes upgrades easy via > > aptitude/apt-get, I find the rather dramatic warnings, strange. > > Your mileage may vary depending on the services you may be running. > There are some very critical changes between Woody and Sarge, esp in > packages such as slapd, exim, etc.
Acknowledged, although the exim4 upgrade seemed to be handled well - the config file was derived from the existing exim3 one. Having said that, it was only dealing with system mail. FWIW the servers were running samba, nfs, cups and all the config files were retained. The install/upgarde process stops where config changes are contemplated and asks whether you wish to accept the maintainer's version - the default is to keep existing config files; they all seemed to work OK. Perhaps I was just lucky ;) > > If you have a highly customised install of woody, then chances are > very high that you may end up with a screwed up system. I would > suggest sticking to woody in such cases. But, if you are running > desktop/less critical installs, then a dist-upgrade may be very well > in order (though, I would be surprised if you aren't tracking Sid > already :) Yep - sid on workstations (upgraded from woody about 18 months ago) Regards Clive -- www.clivemenzies.co.uk ... ...strategies for business -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
