On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 03:19:24PM +0200, Pierre Ynard wrote:
> Is that kind of downgrade supposed to be supported?
No, it is not supposed to be supported.
> I encountered configuration migration problems for apt and postfix,
> shall I file bugs for these?
Probably not.
This is a seldom used f
I've successfully downgraded most of my system from unstable to jessie,
so this seems to be workable.
Among the things I run, there's only MySQL that can't be downgraded just
like that from unstable's 5.6 to jessie's 5.5, and for which there is
no backport of 5.6; and also libstdc++6 that I can't
On Sun, 8 May 2016 00:51:57 +0200
Pierre Ynard wrote:
> > My recommendation would be going to jessie[1], it has whole four
> > years of support left. Anything you need from unstable can be
> > backported.
>
> Hopefully the downgrade path would be workable.
Backports can help with that - those
> My recommendation would be going to jessie[1], it has whole four years
> of support left. Anything you need from unstable can be backported.
Hopefully the downgrade path would be workable.
> After those four years you can reconsider, in the unlikely case your
> machine will be still alive.
Tha
On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 02:42:37AM +0200, Pierre Ynard wrote:
> That's not the idea I'd like to have about Debian. If I wanted
> a distro where unstable is broken and unusable, I would have installed
> long ago.
I'm afraid there's not enough people who care about 586 enough to maintain
it. And t
]] Pierre Ynard
> Please tell me, what do I do with it??
Personally, I'd get some more recent hardware. Or run stable.
In CPU performance terms, a Pentium MMX (at 200MHz) is about half to a
third of the speed of the first-generation raspberry pi (underclocked to
700MHz). There's a limit to ho
Yes, I run unstable in production. My stuff isn't business-critical.
But I can say the same thing about this making it impossible to run
unstable. That's not the idea I'd like to have about Debian. If I wanted
a distro where unstable is broken and unusable, I would have installed
long ago.
I don'
retitle 823465 New binaries won't run at all on i586 Pentium MMX due to illegal
instruction
clone 823465 -1
reassign -1 release-notes
reopen -1
retitle -1 Document dropping i586 support
severity -1 important
thanks
On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 10:28:56PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > So are there r
On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 06:50:43PM +0200, Pierre Ynard wrote:
> This is my production system and I run a lot of services on it. This
on *unstable*?
> So are there release notes somewhere? What's the recommended course of
I don't believe there are, as the release and release notes are still
a few
On Thu, 5 May 2016 22:51:47 +0500
Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 06:50:43PM +0200, Pierre Ynard wrote:
> > This is my production system and I run a lot of services on it.
> You are running sid on your production system, correct?
>
> > So are there release notes somewhere?
retitle 823465 Dropping i586 support unexpectedly breaks i586 systems on upgrade
stop
That's nice. That piece of information didn't get to me. I didn't read
that gcc changelog either because I haven't upgraded it on my system.
This is my production system and I run a lot of services on it. This
i
reassign 823465 general
thanks
On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 04:15:31AM +0200, Pierre Ynard wrote:
> So it seems the archive is filling with new builds that won't run on my
> hardware. Great! Sorry for the noise, please assist with triaging.
See gcc-defaults changelog:
gcc-defaults (1.151) unstable; u
12 matches
Mail list logo
