Re: Upgrade from f19
On 07/09/17 22:03, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
[resend, never saw the first one]
I have a server running f19 (don't ask). It is heavily customised so I prefer
to not do a fresh install of f26 and reconfigure everything.
I am reading the upgrade guide at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrading?rd=Upgrade
which says (Upgrading from End of life releases).
"If you have Fedora 20 or earlier, you will have to perform at least
part of the upgrade with bare yum. You can either use that method to upgrade
to Fedora 21 or later"
My plan is to do this
f19 -> f21 (yum)
following
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upgrading_Fedora_using_package_manager
f21 -> f26 (DNF system upgrade)
I suspect that attempting to go directly to f26 may be a bridge too far.
I will check and clean the system before/after each step.
Beyond the listed "common problems", is there any reason to not follow this
path?
Is there a better way?
TIA
This report is just for the record, in case someone as lazy as myself faces a
similar predicament.
The responses I got all say "do not do that, it will be a big pain". While I
expect this to
be the case, the number of customizations means a major pain trying to reapply
from scratch.
I do not even remember all the changes, this system started around 2000? maybe
earlier.
I looked at my upgrade history and could see that on another machine I already
kept up:
19->22
22->24
24->26
so I decided to try the same here. I took a full clonezilla backup of the f19
system...
I now completed the first step, which I expect is the more difficult. Yes, I
had to deal
with many issues, like post upgrade conflicts, mysql->mariadb, out-of-kernel
module not building,
about 40 .rpm{save,new}, syslogd messages change (I scrape some),... but it was
all sorted
out in about 4 hours of careful attention. After all, is there a better way to
spend
a Saturday?
I will see if all is well for a few more days before attempting the next steps.
The next issue for me will be MythTV 0.27->0.28 upgrade at some point.
After all is done I will need to deal with the leftover fluff, like orphans etc.
cheers
--
Eyal Lebedinsky (fed...@eyal.emu.id.au)
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Possible to "dnf upgrade" in a Fedora Gnome without the need to reboot?
On Sun, 2017-09-10 at 14:07 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 09/10/2017 07:07 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > as I update it every morning using dnf. That's my choice. The reboot > > generally takes about 30 seconds, unless I'm running a Windows VM in > > which case I usually try to shut it down properly, which can take a > > long time. If I were administering a mail and web service with several > > If you're using KVM/QEMU, you don't need to shut down the VM. It will > be paused for the reboot (memory saved) and then resumed when the server > comes back up. It is a very nice feature and I think it's the default > now, but obviously you should verify that before trying. The VM has a > higher uptime than the host. :-) Would that it were so simple :-) The VM is running VFIO passthrough for a second GPU which I use for gaming. The state of the GPU will not be saved by freezing the VM, even when a game is not actually running. Windows doesn't have a "hibernate" feature except for laptops, and there doesn't appear to be a way of convincing it that the VM is a laptop (the GPU drivers are a dead giveaway). Thus killing the libvirtd process is equivalent to a system reset AFAIK. poc ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Possible to "dnf upgrade" in a Fedora Gnome without the need to reboot?
On 09/10/2017 07:07 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: as I update it every morning using dnf. That's my choice. The reboot generally takes about 30 seconds, unless I'm running a Windows VM in which case I usually try to shut it down properly, which can take a long time. If I were administering a mail and web service with several If you're using KVM/QEMU, you don't need to shut down the VM. It will be paused for the reboot (memory saved) and then resumed when the server comes back up. It is a very nice feature and I think it's the default now, but obviously you should verify that before trying. The VM has a higher uptime than the host. :-) ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Possible to "dnf upgrade" in a Fedora Gnome without the need to reboot?
On Sun, 2017-09-10 at 12:22 -0400, Bill Shirley wrote: > Don't take it that I'm recommending not to update. (Kids, don't try this at > home). > You just have to be cautious what you do to a server that has to be up > 25 hours a day, 8 1/2 days a week, and 365 days a year which is hundreds > of miles away. :-) Once again, only you know your situation, but this is simply not a case in which I would be using Fedora. > I had one server that had 1100+ days uptime until the operator rebooted the > wrong server in the cluster. This was a couple of years ago so, add about 730 > days to that. We finally had to reboot last month because of a failing hard > drive. > I know you'll think I'm lying, but it was a Seagate Barracuda. =-O I can believe that. I have a NAS that came with 2 of those. Luckily I had them in a RAID-1 (mirror) configuration, because first one of them failed and a few months later so did the other one. poc ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Possible to "dnf upgrade" in a Fedora Gnome without the need to reboot?
are not getting ANY updates. They are not getting a new kernel. They are not getting security updates. They are not getting "maintained". They ARE being maintained. It's possible to update some rpms without updating the release: https://www.spinics.net/linux/fedora/fedora-users/msg477184.html dnf updates can go wrong: https://www.spinics.net/linux/fedora/fedora-users/msg476574.html I had that happen to the server sitting behind me. It would have been much harder to recover from if the server, my eyes, and my hands were across the country. I once 'talked' someone through recovering from both drives failing in a md mirror. We replaced one drive and then the other failed. It was probably a heat problem since one or more case fans had failed. I actually never spoke to him (he has a thick accent which is hard to understand); we just conversed with SMS messages and screen shots. Don't take it that I'm recommending not to update. (Kids, don't try this at home). You just have to be cautious what you do to a server that has to be up 25 hours a day, 8 1/2 days a week, and 365 days a year which is hundreds of miles away. :-) I had one server that had 1100+ days uptime until the operator rebooted the wrong server in the cluster. This was a couple of years ago so, add about 730 days to that. We finally had to reboot last month because of a failing hard drive. I know you'll think I'm lying, but it was a Seagate Barracuda. =-O Bill ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Possible to "dnf upgrade" in a Fedora Gnome without the need to reboot?
On 09/10/17 21:55, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote: > On Sun, 2017-09-10 at 21:26 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: >> On 09/10/17 21:03, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote: >>> On Sun, 2017-09-10 at 11:37 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: On Sun, 2017-09-10 at 03:21 -0400, Bill Shirley wrote: > Just a couple of my servers: > [0:root@apinetstore2 ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release > Fedora release 21 (Twenty One) > [0:root@apinetstore2 ~]$ uptime > 02:18:00 up 949 days, 17:08, 1 user, load average: 0.21, 0.41, 0.44 > > [0:root@elvis ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release > Fedora release 16 (Verne) > [0:root@elvis ~]$ uptime > 02:19:02 up 553 days, 16:00, 4 users, load average: 0.20, 0.16, 0.14 > > It's usually a disk wearing out that forces a reboot. All that means is that you're running out-of-date systems on your servers. >>> It's also a strong hint that it's possible to have machines up and >>> running for >>> such a long time. >> Sure. If you never do any updates! > I wouldn't recommend that: What I wanted to say, was: give us the updates, > make > sure they're safely applied in a running system *and* remove the need to > reboot. > And yes, I know this is stuff from a still distant future ... > IMO, you're making a mountain out of a mole hill. Don't want to do reboots "too" often (with "too often" being subjective) then don't update "too" often. Your system is up 24/7 and you are concerned about the few minutes of downtime while the rebooting is happening? Schedule the reboot while you're sleeping. You do sleep, yes? Or while you eat lunch. You must eat. You have systems providing vital services 24hrs/day to people outside of your local network and have service level agreements? Look into load balancing and/or fail-over systems so you can update one system while not affecting the service. Of course you do understand that the software provided by Linux distributions is open-source and written by a vast number of people with no central control. I mean there isn't a central authority that can demand and enforce the edict "remove the need to reboot". So, simply define your goals for how you want to maintain your system and develop your procedures to meet these goals. -- Fedora Users List - The place to go to speculate endlessly signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Possible to "dnf upgrade" in a Fedora Gnome without the need to reboot?
On Sun, 2017-09-10 at 15:03 +0200, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote: > > All that means is that you're running out-of-date systems on your > > servers. > > It's also a strong hint that it's possible to have machines up and > running for such a long time. That isn't news. Anyone who has used or administered Unix/Linux for the last 4 decades or so, as I have, knows this. The question is whether you want to actually maintain your system in a stable and secure condition, or just try for some meaningless uptime record. If it's the former, you'll update it when it's prudent to do so, which of course depends on your specific situation. > That's what this whole debate basically is about: less maintenance > work and more usage of the machines - and to reach that I (and probably > quite a few more than just me) need at least less reboots. It's > doable, see Bill Shirley's machines, and yes: it might need quite some > work to reach that target - question remains: does anyone care? ... :) Speaking personally, no I don't care. I have never used the Gnome update system and cannot imagine why I ever would, but it no doubt works for some people. OTOH I do reboot my personal machine quite often as I update it every morning using dnf. That's my choice. The reboot generally takes about 30 seconds, unless I'm running a Windows VM in which case I usually try to shut it down properly, which can take a long time. If I were administering a mail and web service with several thousand users, as I once did, I simply wouldn't be using Fedora but CentOS or some other LTS distro. And I would still reboot it when necessary, after a judicious advisory period. poc ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Possible to "dnf upgrade" in a Fedora Gnome without the need to reboot?
On Sun, 2017-09-10 at 21:26 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: > On 09/10/17 21:03, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote: > > On Sun, 2017-09-10 at 11:37 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > > On Sun, 2017-09-10 at 03:21 -0400, Bill Shirley wrote: > > > > Just a couple of my servers: > > > > [0:root@apinetstore2 ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release > > > > Fedora release 21 (Twenty One) > > > > [0:root@apinetstore2 ~]$ uptime > > > > 02:18:00 up 949 days, 17:08, 1 user, load average: 0.21, 0.41, 0.44 > > > > > > > > [0:root@elvis ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release > > > > Fedora release 16 (Verne) > > > > [0:root@elvis ~]$ uptime > > > > 02:19:02 up 553 days, 16:00, 4 users, load average: 0.20, 0.16, 0.14 > > > > > > > > It's usually a disk wearing out that forces a reboot. > > > > > > All that means is that you're running out-of-date systems on your > > > servers. > > > > It's also a strong hint that it's possible to have machines up and > > running for > > such a long time. > > Sure. If you never do any updates! I wouldn't recommend that: What I wanted to say, was: give us the updates, make sure they're safely applied in a running system *and* remove the need to reboot. And yes, I know this is stuff from a still distant future ... Regards Wolfgang -- Computers are great: they help us can fix things that without them wouldn't be broken. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Possible to "dnf upgrade" in a Fedora Gnome without the need to reboot?
On 09/10/17 21:03, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote: > On Sun, 2017-09-10 at 11:37 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: >> On Sun, 2017-09-10 at 03:21 -0400, Bill Shirley wrote: >>> Just a couple of my servers: >>> [0:root@apinetstore2 ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release >>> Fedora release 21 (Twenty One) >>> [0:root@apinetstore2 ~]$ uptime >>> 02:18:00 up 949 days, 17:08, 1 user, load average: 0.21, 0.41, 0.44 >>> >>> [0:root@elvis ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release >>> Fedora release 16 (Verne) >>> [0:root@elvis ~]$ uptime >>> 02:19:02 up 553 days, 16:00, 4 users, load average: 0.20, 0.16, 0.14 >>> >>> It's usually a disk wearing out that forces a reboot. >> All that means is that you're running out-of-date systems on your >> servers. > It's also a strong hint that it's possible to have machines up and > running for > such a long time. Sure. If you never do any updates! As we've pointed out. The versions showing above are EOL. As in End Of Life. They are not getting ANY updates. They are not getting a new kernel. They are not getting security updates. They are not getting "maintained". > > That's what this whole debate basically is about: less maintenance > work and more usage of the machines - and to reach that I (and probably > quite a few more than just me) need at least less reboots. It's > doable, see Bill Shirley's machines, and yes: it might need quite some > work to reach that target - question remains: does anyone care? ... :) Seriously, all you have to do is not update until you want to and you can reduce the number of reboots that take all of a few minutes for most reasonably powered systems. Do updates once a month if you want. Maybe you want to keep an eye out for serious security updates that pop up from time to time. But if everything is working for you then you aren't obligated to apply updates simply because they are available. > Have all a nice Sunday! > Already just about over here. -- Fedora Users List - The place to go to speculate endlessly signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Possible to "dnf upgrade" in a Fedora Gnome without the need to reboot?
On Sun, 2017-09-10 at 11:37 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > On Sun, 2017-09-10 at 03:21 -0400, Bill Shirley wrote: > > Just a couple of my servers: > > [0:root@apinetstore2 ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release > > Fedora release 21 (Twenty One) > > [0:root@apinetstore2 ~]$ uptime > > 02:18:00 up 949 days, 17:08, 1 user, load average: 0.21, 0.41, 0.44 > > > > [0:root@elvis ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release > > Fedora release 16 (Verne) > > [0:root@elvis ~]$ uptime > > 02:19:02 up 553 days, 16:00, 4 users, load average: 0.20, 0.16, 0.14 > > > > It's usually a disk wearing out that forces a reboot. > > All that means is that you're running out-of-date systems on your > servers. It's also a strong hint that it's possible to have machines up and running for such a long time. That's what this whole debate basically is about: less maintenance work and more usage of the machines - and to reach that I (and probably quite a few more than just me) need at least less reboots. It's doable, see Bill Shirley's machines, and yes: it might need quite some work to reach that target - question remains: does anyone care? ... :) Have all a nice Sunday! Regards Wolfgang ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Upgrade from f19
Allegedly, on or about 7 September 2017, Eyal Lebedinsky sent: > I have a server running f19 (don't ask). It is heavily customised so > I prefer to not do a fresh install of f26 and reconfigure everything. In my experience, you'll spend far more time trying to do what you want (install several updates, try to get things to carry over from one version to the next without major failures due to changes between versions, trying to carry on using software that you use but no-long exists, etc), than installing a fresh new version on another disc or partition, then copying old data and configurations into the new system. Even if nothing goes wrong, the time involved in several system updates isn't insignificant. For what it's worth, I still have a FC4 server, it does what I need it to do, it's isolated on a LAN, no point in changing it. But the other things around it are kept much closer to the current release. -- [tim@localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp Linux 4.12.8-300.fc26.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Aug 17 15:30:20 UTC 2017 x86_64 Boilerplate: All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted. There is no point trying to privately email me, I only get to see the messages posted to the mailing list. Damn, I didn't mean to press *that* button! ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Possible to "dnf upgrade" in a Fedora Gnome without the need to reboot?
On Sun, 2017-09-10 at 03:21 -0400, Bill Shirley wrote: > Just a couple of my servers: > [0:root@apinetstore2 ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release > Fedora release 21 (Twenty One) > [0:root@apinetstore2 ~]$ uptime > 02:18:00 up 949 days, 17:08, 1 user, load average: 0.21, 0.41, 0.44 > > [0:root@elvis ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release > Fedora release 16 (Verne) > [0:root@elvis ~]$ uptime > 02:19:02 up 553 days, 16:00, 4 users, load average: 0.20, 0.16, 0.14 > > It's usually a disk wearing out that forces a reboot. All that means is that you're running out-of-date systems on your servers. Not usually a good idea, and not what Fedora is intended for. poc ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Build signature doesn't match environment failed loading RPMDB
On 09/10/17 16:31, Sudhir Khanger wrote: > Hello, > > I regularly get the message below when I update my system. > > BDB1539 Build signature doesn't match environment > failed loading RPMDB > The downloaded packages were saved in cache until the next successful > transaction. > You can remove cached packages by executing 'dnf clean packages'. > > The full log is available here > https://gist.github.com/sudhirkhanger/90233a2ee0c4137d1f39138c34b22250 Looks as if you may be seeing this https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1483553 -- Fedora Users List - The place to go to speculate endlessly signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Build signature doesn't match environment failed loading RPMDB
Hello, I regularly get the message below when I update my system. BDB1539 Build signature doesn't match environment failed loading RPMDB The downloaded packages were saved in cache until the next successful transaction. You can remove cached packages by executing 'dnf clean packages'. The full log is available here https://gist.github.com/sudhirkhanger/90233a2ee0c4137d1f39138c34b22250 Thanks. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Possible to "dnf upgrade" in a Fedora Gnome without the need to reboot?
On 09/10/17 15:21, Bill Shirley wrote: > Just a couple of my servers: > [0:root@apinetstore2 ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release > Fedora release 21 (Twenty One) > [0:root@apinetstore2 ~]$ uptime > 02:18:00 up 949 days, 17:08, 1 user, load average: 0.21, 0.41, 0.44 > > [0:root@elvis ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release > Fedora release 16 (Verne) > [0:root@elvis ~]$ uptime > 02:19:02 up 553 days, 16:00, 4 users, load average: 0.20, 0.16, 0.14 Well, since those versions are EOL and no updates are being released for them that is to be expected. So, not sure what value that adds to anything. -- Fedora Users List - The place to go to speculate endlessly signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Possible to "dnf upgrade" in a Fedora Gnome without the need to reboot?
Just a couple of my servers: [0:root@apinetstore2 ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release Fedora release 21 (Twenty One) [0:root@apinetstore2 ~]$ uptime 02:18:00 up 949 days, 17:08, 1 user, load average: 0.21, 0.41, 0.44 [0:root@elvis ~]$ cat /etc/redhat-release Fedora release 16 (Verne) [0:root@elvis ~]$ uptime 02:19:02 up 553 days, 16:00, 4 users, load average: 0.20, 0.16, 0.14 It's usually a disk wearing out that forces a reboot. Bill On 9/8/2017 4:33 PM, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote: On Thu, 2017-09-07 at 14:16 +0200, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote: In previous times, on a Debian system, I rebooted the machine maybe once or twice a year (not kidding ..) and it worked Addendum: I just remembered that at least the last years I had run that system I didn't update it at all (was impossible - messed up dependencies). So actually these last years there obviously wasn't any need for a reboot ... So please take the quoted previous comment with the necessarily limited value. I *think* tho' (not being sure ...) that the years preceding these mentioned last years I also rarely rebooted ... Wolfgang ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: installing updates not in the background on F26? reboot giving me a 15 min delay...
On 09/09/2017 05:24 PM, Peter Teuben wrote: Installed Fedora-26, which was fast and a snap... now doing the first reboot, since it wanted to install updates. I've been sitting here for literally 15 minutes watching a useless black screen... much like how windows does this.. Is that just an unhappy default, or required. In Ubuntu they are downloaded as you continue to work, you reboot, and that's usually quick, and you're back to work, usually that all takes a minute. That is strange. The packages would have been downloaded and prepared, then you reboot and they are installed. I don't remember ever doing the offline updates, but I assumed it would be similar to the release upgrade process where it gives you a progress bar and package counts. I doubt that a clear black screen is ok. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
