Hi Nick,
thanks for your answer. I have to re-read the docs, as all I found was a md
file with some basic upgrade steps.
I'm sure I missed a lot, as Oliver already wrote.
But what you explained, is basically more or less the same I did, so I guess
that everything should work now.
Strangely, the SCEP part was no big deal for me and was working more or less
immediately after configuring.
Well, we aren't really in production, either, as the system is just used for
internal processes and it is not mission-critical, but I like OpenXPKI very
much and want to keep using it on future - always with the newest features, of
course.
Thanks again and
best regards
Thomas
Am 29. August 2023 01:07:20 MESZ schrieb Nick Dawson
<[email protected]>:
>It might not be the best answer nor most accurate… but when I did an
>upgrade recently, I found that I had to spend a lot of time with the
>documentation and the current config directory from GitHub.
>
>Running diffs on the config files and workflows helped a lot. I found it
>easier to simply replace all the workflows with the latest copies from
>Github, and then re-apply any customizations I had.
>
>For the config files, I knew which ones I'd changed. I found it easier to
>open each one in a side-by-side editor with the new configs and manually
>change the new ones.
>
>The one that vexed me the most was SCEP. After doing a system-wide grep, I
>finally realized my web server was calling the wrong FCGI - point being,
>don't forget to check your WebUI stuff.
>
>I can't help much with the database questions - I never had to make as big
>of a version migration as you are doing.
>
>The other thing I've done recently was to stand up a completely new
>instance. I used the same Root CA but issued new intermediate CAs for a new
>set of realms. The config is a copy of the github current config with my
>customizations. My thought is to be able to more efficently diff any new
>minor version changes. I'm slowly re-keying everything over to the new
>instance.
>
>Worth noting - we're not in production yet. It's been two years of testing
>without moving away from our current canonical CA… but I feel like we're
>getting a lot closer!
>
>Good luck!
>
>
>
>
>On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 2:17 PM, Thomas Schachtner <
>[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi there,
>>
>> I just wanted to tell about my efforts to upgrade OpenXPKI to its newest
>> version 3.26.
>>
>> I was using an old Ubuntu build (v2.5.5) on an old Ubuntu box. I upgraded
>> the OS and also updated the OpenXPKI apt sources file to its newest
>> releases on each os upgrade.
>>
>> After the upgrade, OpenXPKI did not run anymore, which was expected, as I
>> did not yet follow the upgrade instructions. (I found them on GitHub)
>>
>> But even after doing so, I did not seem to have the newest files
>> installed. I ended up cloning the config repository and replacing all the
>> old files in my realm directories.
>> Is this the the way an update is meant to be done?
>>
>> If not, or if the newest files are also being downloaded during "apt-get
>> upgrade", it would be good to know where they are placed. (Maybe there's a
>> well-known directory in the filesystem hierarchy standard and I just don't
>> know that, so please bear with me...)
>>
>> But even after updating all the files, I kept getting crashes. When
>> looking into the logs, I saw that there are some changes to the database
>> schema which were not mentioned in the docs (or which I didn't see).
>> Btw, I performed all the schema updates form 1.x to 2.x a long time ago,
>> but there seem to have been added some new columns since that time which I
>> did not have in my database. After adding the missing columns one after
>> another, I saw that there's a schema version informativ in the database
>> which did also not yet exist in my installation.
>> (There was a warning message about that, but I did not know where to
>> specify the database schema version.)
>> Would it have been better to just set the schema version to some specific
>> value and to be able to keep using the previous schema? If so, which value
>> would that be?
>>
>> I also found that now there are SEQUENCEs in the database where there have
>> been standard tables before. I updated that as well.
>>
>> So now my question:
>> Did I do the update correctly?
>> Or is there rather a better way to do it?
>>
>> I have another instance which is used actively by some users as production
>> system and I would prefer to update that system exactly as the update is
>> meant to be done.
>>
>> By the way, thank you very much for this great piece of software you
>> created and provide to us!
>>
>> Best regards
>> Tom
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenXPKI-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openxpki-users
>>
--
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet.
_______________________________________________
OpenXPKI-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openxpki-users
