Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #228577 > unrolled thread

An old box running Debian 8

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  An old box running Debian 8 Miroslav Skoric <skoric@uns.ac.rs> - 2020-11-11 18:50 +0100
    Re: An old box running Debian 8 Linux-Fan <Ma_Sys.ma@web.de> - 2020-11-11 19:10 +0100
      Re: An old box running Debian 8 Miroslav Skoric <skoric@uns.ac.rs> - 2020-11-12 23:50 +0100
        Re: An old box running Debian 8 Linux-Fan <Ma_Sys.ma@web.de> - 2020-11-13 00:20 +0100
          Re: An old box running Debian 8 Miroslav Skoric <skoric@uns.ac.rs> - 2020-11-13 15:20 +0100
            Re: An old box running Debian 8 Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-11-13 16:00 +0100
              Re: An old box running Debian 8 David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-11-13 21:30 +0100
                Re: An old box running Debian 8 Miroslav Skoric <skoric@uns.ac.rs> - 2020-11-14 17:50 +0100
                  Re: An old box running Debian 8 Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-11-15 09:50 +0100
                    Re: An old box running Debian 8 David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-11-17 16:30 +0100
                      Re: An old box running Debian 8 Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-11-17 16:50 +0100
                        Re: An old box running Debian 8 David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-11-18 16:50 +0100
                          Re: An old box running Debian 8 Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-11-18 17:00 +0100
                          Re: An old box running Debian 8 Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2020-11-18 18:20 +0100
                            Re: An old box running Debian 8 Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2020-11-18 19:10 +0100
                              Re: An old box running Debian 8 David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-11-18 21:40 +0100
              Re: An old box running Debian 8 Miroslav Skoric <skoric@uns.ac.rs> - 2020-11-14 17:50 +0100
    Re: An old box running Debian 8 Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-11-11 19:10 +0100
      Re: An old box running Debian 8 Miroslav Skoric <skoric@uns.ac.rs> - 2020-11-12 23:50 +0100
    Re: An old box running Debian 8 Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2020-11-11 19:50 +0100
      Re: An old box running Debian 8 Miroslav Skoric <skoric@uns.ac.rs> - 2020-11-12 23:50 +0100
        Re: An old box running Debian 8 Doug McGarrett <dmcgarrett@optonline.net> - 2020-11-13 02:40 +0100
          Re: An old box running Debian 8 Miroslav Skoric <skoric@uns.ac.rs> - 2020-11-13 15:20 +0100
            Re: An old box running Debian 8 Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2020-11-13 15:40 +0100
              Re: An old box running Debian 8 Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2020-11-13 16:20 +0100
                Re: An old box running Debian 8 Dan Ritter <Dan@randomstring.org> - 2020-11-13 16:30 +0100
                  Re: An old box running Debian 8 Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2020-11-13 17:30 +0100
                    Re: An old box running Debian 8 Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2020-11-14 00:20 +0100
                  Re: An old box running Debian 8 Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2020-11-13 17:50 +0100
                    Re: An old box running Debian 8 Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2020-11-13 18:10 +0100
    Re: An old box running Debian 8 Long Wind <longwind2@yahoo.com> - 2020-11-11 21:50 +0100
      Re: Celeron vis a vis Pentium (was: An old box running Debian 8) Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2020-11-11 22:30 +0100
        Re: Celeron vis a vis Pentium (was: An old box running Debian 8) Long Wind <longwind2@yahoo.com> - 2020-11-12 04:50 +0100
        Re: Celeron vis a vis Pentium Miroslav Skoric <skoric@uns.ac.rs> - 2020-11-13 15:20 +0100
    Re: An old box running Debian 8 Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2020-11-11 22:10 +0100
      Re: An old box running Debian 8 Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2020-11-11 22:30 +0100
        Re: An old box running Debian 8 riveravaldez <riveravaldezmail@gmail.com> - 2020-11-12 03:40 +0100
          Re: An old box running Debian 8 Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2020-11-12 10:00 +0100
            Re: An old box running Debian 8 Miroslav Skoric <skoric@uns.ac.rs> - 2020-11-14 17:50 +0100
              Re: An old box running Debian 8 Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2020-11-14 18:50 +0100
                Re: An old box running Debian 8 Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2020-11-14 20:30 +0100
                  Re: An old box running Debian 8 John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-11-14 21:50 +0100
                    Re: An old box running Debian 8 Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2020-11-14 22:40 +0100
                      Re: An old box running Debian 8 John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2020-11-14 23:20 +0100
              Re: An old box running Debian 8 Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2020-11-14 20:40 +0100
      Re: An old box running Debian 8 Miroslav Skoric <skoric@uns.ac.rs> - 2020-11-12 23:50 +0100
        Re: An old box running Debian 8 Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2020-11-13 00:00 +0100
          Re: An old box running Debian 8 Linux-Fan <Ma_Sys.ma@web.de> - 2020-11-13 00:40 +0100
        Re: An old box running Debian 8 Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2020-11-13 01:00 +0100
        Re: An old box running Debian 8 Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-11-13 13:10 +0100
        Re: An old box running Debian 8 Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-11-13 13:40 +0100
    Re: An old box running Debian 8 Patrick Bartek <nemommxiv@gmail.com> - 2020-11-13 00:10 +0100
      Re: An old box running Debian 8 Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-11-13 13:10 +0100

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#228577 — An old box running Debian 8

I have an old comp (CPU Pentium II Celeron 400 MHz, 224 MB RAM) running 
ham radio server in Debian 8. It works well in CLI, but very slow after 
starting GUI. I wonder whether it would be worth to try (if possible at 
all) to upgrade it to Debian 9. Any experience with such old boxes?

Misko YT7MPB

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#228578

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Miroslav Skoric writes:

> I have an old comp (CPU Pentium II Celeron 400 MHz, 224 MB RAM) running ham  
> radio server in Debian 8. It works well in CLI, but very slow after starting  
> GUI. I wonder whether it would be worth to try (if possible at all) to  
> upgrade it to Debian 9. Any experience with such old boxes?
>
> Misko YT7MPB

Pentium II is old indeed. Whenever using old processors, it is important to  
test if the new kernel will still support them.

As long as you stay on the CLI I do not expect there to be a major  
performance degradation from the upgrade.

I am running Debian 10 on an old laptop (Acer TravelMate 210) with 128 MiB  
of RAM and 700 MHz Intel Celeron (?) and it is slow even on commandline use  
with "heavy" applications like vim or maxima. Other tools, like sc-im run  
quickly enough, though...

HTH
Linux-Fan

öö

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228606

On 11/11/20 7:09 PM, Linux-Fan wrote:

> 
> Pentium II is old indeed. Whenever using old processors, it is important 
> to test if the new kernel will still support them.
> 

So maybe I shall try some newer kernel only?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228611

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Miroslav Skoric writes:

> On 11/11/20 7:09 PM, Linux-Fan wrote:
>
>> Pentium II is old indeed. Whenever using old processors, it is important to
>> test if the new kernel will still support them.
>
> So maybe I shall try some newer kernel only?

If you have an easy means to do that: Yes, I would highly recommend doing
that.

YMMV
Linux-Fan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228625

On 11/13/20 12:12 AM, Linux-Fan wrote:

> Miroslav Skoric writes:
> 
>> On 11/11/20 7:09 PM, Linux-Fan wrote:
>>
>>> Pentium II is old indeed. Whenever using old processors, it is 
>>> important to
>>> test if the new kernel will still support them.
>>
>> So maybe I shall try some newer kernel only?
> 
> If you have an easy means to do that: Yes, I would highly recommend doing
> that.
> 

I'll consider that kind of test (if possible at all). Need to check what 
(newer) kernels are available in Debian 8 repository. Cannot remember 
now what (if any) kernel change occurred when I upgraded 7 to 8.

Misko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228629

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Vi, 13 nov 20, 14:06:52, Miroslav Skoric wrote:
> On 11/13/20 12:12 AM, Linux-Fan wrote:
> 
> > Miroslav Skoric writes:
> > 
> > > On 11/11/20 7:09 PM, Linux-Fan wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Pentium II is old indeed. Whenever using old processors, it is
> > > > important to
> > > > test if the new kernel will still support them.
> > > 
> > > So maybe I shall try some newer kernel only?
> > 
> > If you have an easy means to do that: Yes, I would highly recommend doing
> > that.
> > 
> 
> I'll consider that kind of test (if possible at all). Need to check what
> (newer) kernels are available in Debian 8 repository. Cannot remember now
> what (if any) kernel change occurred when I upgraded 7 to 8.

Just for testing purposes you could try a jessie-backports kernel 
downloaded from snapshots or even the kernel from Debian 9 (stretch).

Using a kernel from a newer release is generally less dangerous that 
many other packages. Worst case one can just reboot to the previous 
kernel.

Beware that LTS support for jessie ended in June 2020.

https://www.debian.org/releases/jessie/

That system should be upgraded to some release with security support as 
soon as possible, especially since it's dealing with e-mail as far as I 
understand from your other messages.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228639

On Fri 13 Nov 2020 at 16:52:41 (+0200), Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Vi, 13 nov 20, 14:06:52, Miroslav Skoric wrote:
> > On 11/13/20 12:12 AM, Linux-Fan wrote:
> > > Miroslav Skoric writes:
> > > > On 11/11/20 7:09 PM, Linux-Fan wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Pentium II is old indeed. Whenever using old processors, it is
> > > > > important to
> > > > > test if the new kernel will still support them.
> > > > 
> > > > So maybe I shall try some newer kernel only?
> > > 
> > > If you have an easy means to do that: Yes, I would highly recommend doing
> > > that.
> > 
> > I'll consider that kind of test (if possible at all). Need to check what
> > (newer) kernels are available in Debian 8 repository. Cannot remember now
> > what (if any) kernel change occurred when I upgraded 7 to 8.
> 
> Just for testing purposes you could try a jessie-backports kernel 
> downloaded from snapshots or even the kernel from Debian 9 (stretch).
> 
> Using a kernel from a newer release is generally less dangerous that 
> many other packages. Worst case one can just reboot to the previous 
> kernel.
> 
> Beware that LTS support for jessie ended in June 2020.
> 
> https://www.debian.org/releases/jessie/
> 
> That system should be upgraded to some release with security support as 
> soon as possible, especially since it's dealing with e-mail as far as I 
> understand from your other messages.

I would have thought that Debian has made kernel testing just about as
easy as they can since:
jessie  installs with 3.16 but 4.9  is also available,
stretch installs with 4.9  but 4.19 is also available,
buster  installs with 4.19
so there's full overlap. (I've not looked at backports.)

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228653

On 11/13/20 9:29 PM, David Wright wrote:

> 
> I would have thought that Debian has made kernel testing just about as
> easy as they can since:
> jessie  installs with 3.16 but 4.9  is also available,
> stretch installs with 4.9  but 4.19 is also available,
> buster  installs with 4.19
> so there's full overlap. (I've not looked at backports.)
> 

That's actually what I also thought about.

Btw, when you say 'installs', do you mean a fresh installation only, or 
it includes a 'forced' kernel update during a distribution upgrade? My 
old box was installed for the first time in squeeze, then upgraded to 
wheezy, then to jessie.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228666

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sb, 14 nov 20, 16:36:03, Miroslav Skoric wrote:
> On 11/13/20 9:29 PM, David Wright wrote:
> 
> > 
> > I would have thought that Debian has made kernel testing just about as
> > easy as they can since:
> > jessie  installs with 3.16 but 4.9  is also available,
> > stretch installs with 4.9  but 4.19 is also available,
> > buster  installs with 4.19
> > so there's full overlap. (I've not looked at backports.)
> > 
> 
> That's actually what I also thought about.
> 
> Btw, when you say 'installs', do you mean a fresh installation only, or it
> includes a 'forced' kernel update during a distribution upgrade? My old box
> was installed for the first time in squeeze, then upgraded to wheezy, then
> to jessie.

It depends on whether you have the corresponding linux-image-<sub-arch> 
package installed or not.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228723

On Sun 15 Nov 2020 at 10:41:55 (+0200), Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Sb, 14 nov 20, 16:36:03, Miroslav Skoric wrote:
> > On 11/13/20 9:29 PM, David Wright wrote:
> > 
> > > I would have thought that Debian has made kernel testing just about as
> > > easy as they can since:
> > > jessie  installs with 3.16 but 4.9  is also available,
> > > stretch installs with 4.9  but 4.19 is also available,
> > > buster  installs with 4.19
> > > so there's full overlap. (I've not looked at backports.)
> > 
> > That's actually what I also thought about.
> > 
> > Btw, when you say 'installs', do you mean a fresh installation only, or it
> > includes a 'forced' kernel update during a distribution upgrade? My old box
> > was installed for the first time in squeeze, then upgraded to wheezy, then
> > to jessie.

By "installs with", I meant the former, ie the version supplied with
the debian-installer. Once you're happy with that version, it's
possible to install the newer version, leaving the old one as a
fallback (assuming the usual things like enough room in /boot, etc).

> It depends on whether you have the corresponding linux-image-<sub-arch> 
> package installed or not.

I'm not sure what difference this would make. Looking at all
the linux-image-X86* packages in stretch, they all depend on
linux-image-4.9-* packages.

One minor point: if linux-image-586/linux-image-3.16.0-10-586
is your current kernel version, linux-image-4.9-686 is the
next kernel to try. (For some reason, there was never a non-PAE
version of 3.16.0-*-686 packaged.)

So AFAICT, to upgrade to my "also available" kernels above, you
have to specifically install them. I hesitate to use the term
"force" because that has different connotations for apt/dpkg.

And I wouldn't combine it with a regular distribution upgrade.
In fact, that's the whole point of my posting: to do each kernel
change "long" after a distribution upgrade and "long" before the
next one. ("Long" might be a single day of regression testing the
system to make sure you're happy that everything still works
after the change.)

So the sequence would be:

jessie with 3.16 running ok
  new kernel installation
jessie with 4.9 running ok
  distribution upgrade
stretch with 4.9 running ok
  new kernel installation
stretch with 4.19 running ok
  distribution upgrade
buster with 4.19 running ok

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228725

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Ma, 17 nov 20, 09:24:05, David Wright wrote:
> On Sun 15 Nov 2020 at 10:41:55 (+0200), Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > On Sb, 14 nov 20, 16:36:03, Miroslav Skoric wrote:
> > > On 11/13/20 9:29 PM, David Wright wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I would have thought that Debian has made kernel testing just about as
> > > > easy as they can since:
> > > > jessie  installs with 3.16 but 4.9  is also available,
> > > > stretch installs with 4.9  but 4.19 is also available,
> > > > buster  installs with 4.19
> > > > so there's full overlap. (I've not looked at backports.)
> > > 
> > > That's actually what I also thought about.
> > > 
> > > Btw, when you say 'installs', do you mean a fresh installation only, or it
> > > includes a 'forced' kernel update during a distribution upgrade? My old box
> > > was installed for the first time in squeeze, then upgraded to wheezy, then
> > > to jessie.
> 
> By "installs with", I meant the former, ie the version supplied with
> the debian-installer. Once you're happy with that version, it's
> possible to install the newer version, leaving the old one as a
> fallback (assuming the usual things like enough room in /boot, etc).
> 
> > It depends on whether you have the corresponding linux-image-<sub-arch> 
> > package installed or not.
> 
> I'm not sure what difference this would make. Looking at all
> the linux-image-X86* packages in stretch, they all depend on
> linux-image-4.9-* packages.

That was meant for the dist-upgrade case. Without the corresponding 
linux-image-<sub-arch> meta-package the kernel will be left as is and 
the user has to manually install a newer kernel from the next 
distribution.

Depending on when in the release cycle the dist-upgrade is done the 
newer kernel image may not even be available yet

The linux-image-<sub-arch> also depends on the default kernel for the 
distribution, e.g. in case of stretch it depends on a
4.9 linux image, for a 4.19 image one has to install 
linux-image-4.19-<sub-arch> (or the linux image package itself).

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228757

On Tue 17 Nov 2020 at 17:43:43 (+0200), Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Ma, 17 nov 20, 09:24:05, David Wright wrote:
> > On Sun 15 Nov 2020 at 10:41:55 (+0200), Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > > On Sb, 14 nov 20, 16:36:03, Miroslav Skoric wrote:
> > > > On 11/13/20 9:29 PM, David Wright wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > I would have thought that Debian has made kernel testing just about as
> > > > > easy as they can since:
> > > > > jessie  installs with 3.16 but 4.9  is also available,
> > > > > stretch installs with 4.9  but 4.19 is also available,
> > > > > buster  installs with 4.19
> > > > > so there's full overlap. (I've not looked at backports.)
> > > > 
> > > > That's actually what I also thought about.
> > > > 
> > > > Btw, when you say 'installs', do you mean a fresh installation only, or it
> > > > includes a 'forced' kernel update during a distribution upgrade? My old box
> > > > was installed for the first time in squeeze, then upgraded to wheezy, then
> > > > to jessie.
> > 
> > By "installs with", I meant the former, ie the version supplied with
> > the debian-installer. Once you're happy with that version, it's
> > possible to install the newer version, leaving the old one as a
> > fallback (assuming the usual things like enough room in /boot, etc).
> > 
> > > It depends on whether you have the corresponding linux-image-<sub-arch> 
> > > package installed or not.
> > 
> > I'm not sure what difference this would make. Looking at all
> > the linux-image-X86* packages in stretch, they all depend on
> > linux-image-4.9-* packages.
> 
> That was meant for the dist-upgrade case. Without the corresponding 
> linux-image-<sub-arch> meta-package the kernel will be left as is and 
> the user has to manually install a newer kernel from the next 
> distribution.

Oh, I see what you're pointing out: that the minor¹ upgrades won't
take place automatically unless linux-image-<sub-arch> meta-package
is installed. Sure. I wasn't concerning myself with that, but only
with trying to avoid an irreversible upgrade followed by inability
to boot.

To spell out what I have been suggesting, the idea is to test the
OP's jessie distribution with the newer kernel, 4.9. If there are
problems, they can fall back to 3.16. Once any problems are sorted,
and it's running 4.9 smoothly, they can upgrade to stretch.

Because the major number (AIUI, the kernel's ABI) doesn't change in
moving to stretch, this should be relatively trivial as far as the
kernel is concerned. In fact, IIRC the Release Notes usually
recommend upgrading the kernel (its minor version upgrade) early
in the distribution upgrade process. These two paragraphs can then
be repeated for stretch and buster.

I don't recall seeing a safer process posted for upgrading a machine
running a single system. I would post detailed logs of my doing it
for myself, but for the fact that I have had the habit (for two
decades) of configuring two root filesystem partitions on my systems,
and alternating between them with fresh installations, ie:
part_A: squeeze → overwritten by → jessie → overwritten by → buster
part_B: lenny → overwritten by → wheezy → overwritten by → stretch
The two systems share their /home and swap. With this structure in
place, I'm a lot more gung-ho about distribution upgrades.

> Depending on when in the release cycle the dist-upgrade is done the 
> newer kernel image may not even be available yet

All the kernels listed above are available now. The OP is playing
catch-up. This is not a strategy being advertised for the future.

> The linux-image-<sub-arch> also depends on the default kernel for the 
> distribution, e.g. in case of stretch it depends on a
> 4.9 linux image, for a 4.19 image one has to install 
> linux-image-4.19-<sub-arch> (or the linux image package itself).

Yes. IIRC, the newer one would typically be included as what was
termed a "technology preview". What you're describing here is the
"intra-distribution", major upgrade of the kernel, and its safety
is ensured because the older, working kernel is left installed
and still available.

None of this is rocket science; it's just trying to move one
step at a time with maximum ability to either hold the new
configuration or retreat (like a rock-climber's "three points
of contact" rule).

¹ ie in x.y.z-ppp numbering, y would be major, z would be minor.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228758

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mi, 18 nov 20, 09:46:04, David Wright wrote:
> On Tue 17 Nov 2020 at 17:43:43 (+0200), Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> 
> > Depending on when in the release cycle the dist-upgrade is done the 
> > newer kernel image may not even be available yet
> 
> All the kernels listed above are available now. The OP is playing
> catch-up. This is not a strategy being advertised for the future.

What I wrote above is actually bogus, except for upgrades from stable to 
testing while I was thinking of oldstable to stable.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228759

David Wright composed on 2020-11-18 09:46 (UTC-0600):

> IIRC the Release Notes usually
> recommend upgrading the kernel (its minor version upgrade) early
> in the distribution upgrade process.
I don't recall ever seeing that. Curious.

Even though all my own installations are in multiboot, for Fedora, Mageia and
openSUSE, I prevent all automatic kernel upgrades, regardless whether major or
minor, dist-upgrade or otherwise. I can't recall any instance of a dist-upgrade
failing in any fashion because a newer kernel hadn't been installed.
-- 
Evolution as taught in public schools, like religion,
	is based on faith, not on science.

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228762

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 12:18:33PM -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
>David Wright composed on 2020-11-18 09:46 (UTC-0600):
>
>> IIRC the Release Notes usually
>> recommend upgrading the kernel (its minor version upgrade) early
>> in the distribution upgrade process.
>I don't recall ever seeing that. Curious.
>
>Even though all my own installations are in multiboot, for Fedora, Mageia and
>openSUSE, I prevent all automatic kernel upgrades, regardless whether major or
>minor, dist-upgrade or otherwise. I can't recall any instance of a dist-upgrade
>failing in any fashion because a newer kernel hadn't been installed.

There are definitely cases which will fail, but it's been a long time 
since that happened in debian--at least if you follow the guideline to 
never skip releases when upgrading.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228767

On Wed 18 Nov 2020 at 13:03:13 (-0500), Michael Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 12:18:33PM -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
> > David Wright composed on 2020-11-18 09:46 (UTC-0600):
> > 
> > > IIRC the Release Notes usually
> > > recommend upgrading the kernel (its minor version upgrade) early
> > > in the distribution upgrade process.
> > I don't recall ever seeing that. Curious.
> > 
> > Even though all my own installations are in multiboot, for Fedora, Mageia and
> > openSUSE, I prevent all automatic kernel upgrades, regardless whether major or
> > minor, dist-upgrade or otherwise. I can't recall any instance of a dist-upgrade
> > failing in any fashion because a newer kernel hadn't been installed.
> 
> There are definitely cases which will fail, but it's been a long time
> since that happened in debian--at least if you follow the guideline to
> never skip releases when upgrading.

A case in point was lenny → squeeze: squeeze's udev was incompatible
with lenny's kernel (§4.4.5 squeeze's Release Notes).

More generally, the end of §4.6.1 in several generations of
Release Notes, it appears.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228654

On 11/13/20 3:52 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:

> 
> Beware that LTS support for jessie ended in June 2020.
> 
> https://www.debian.org/releases/jessie/
> 
> That system should be upgraded to some release with security support as
> soon as possible, especially since it's dealing with e-mail as far as I
> understand from your other messages.
> 

Well, ending LTS support for jessie was one of the reasons for 
considering upgrade 8 to 9. However, in any case it is a single-purpose 
machine where most of activity is 'unconnected'. Furthermore, the comp 
is behind the firewall where almost all in & out activities are banned.

Related to e-mail security: That box stores & forwards amateur radio 
traffic only, where the local users access their mailboxes by ham radio 
stations, not by the Internet. The Internet is used just for 
server-to-server batch exchange, where partnering servers are licensed 
and proven.

(And all of that is plain text only. No html, no scripts ... An 
advantage of ham radio vs. Internet  :-)

Misko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228579

On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 05:40:50PM +0100, Miroslav Skoric wrote:
> I have an old comp (CPU Pentium II Celeron 400 MHz, 224 MB RAM) running ham
> radio server in Debian 8. It works well in CLI, but very slow after starting
> GUI. I wonder whether it would be worth to try (if possible at all) to
> upgrade it to Debian 9. Any experience with such old boxes?

Upgrading to a newer release is not likely to make it faster.  If anything,
it'll be slower (due to increased memory demands of newer software).

It's also worth noting that Debian 8->9 has a huge change to X and video
drivers.  Lots of chipsets are supported *differently* in Debian 9 than
they were in previous versions.  Whether that's good or bad will depend
on the chipset.  Some chipsets may have lost support altogether.

At this point, your system is quite old, and you should not expect it to
last forever.  Even if the software works perfectly, the hardware is
eventually going to fail.  You might want to get ahead of that by buying
something less ancient.  You might even save on electricity by doing this.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228608

On 11/11/20 7:09 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:

> 
> Upgrading to a newer release is not likely to make it faster.  If anything,
> it'll be slower (due to increased memory demands of newer software).
> 

That's something I have already experienced with previous upgrades. But 
it was always in full GUI (either Gnome, KDE, LXDE, Mate, etc). While I 
examined that machine for a 'refurbished' CLI-based system, I removed 
all GUI. And it was not so bad. Then I re-installed Mate desktop again, 
just to run it for some specific tasks such as Thunderbird client. Of 
course the GUI + TB is terribly slow, but it is used only once in a while.

> It's also worth noting that Debian 8->9 has a huge change to X and video
> drivers.  Lots of chipsets are supported *differently* in Debian 9 than
> they were in previous versions.  Whether that's good or bad will depend
> on the chipset.  Some chipsets may have lost support altogether.
> 

On another machine, a little bit better than the first one, I did have a 
big issue: After upgrading 8->9 and restart it did not want to open GUI 
at all, so the only solution was to boot in CLI, then 'startx' GUI. So I 
suppose than on this (older) box, GUI might be even more problematic. 
(It is Matrox MGA 400.)

On the other side, it makes me wonder if just CLI-only packages in 
Debian 9 would make it too slow after upgrade (if workable at all).

> At this point, your system is quite old, and you should not expect it to
> last forever.  Even if the software works perfectly, the hardware is
> eventually going to fail.  You might want to get ahead of that by buying
> something less ancient.  You might even save on electricity by doing this.
> 
> 

Yeah, I know. The point was to use it until the hardware dies :-)
Electricity? It is in the ham union's office, so nobody cares :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#228580

Miroslav Skoric composed on 2020-11-11 17:40 (UTC+0100):

> I have an old comp (CPU Pentium II Celeron 400 MHz, 224 MB RAM) running 
> ham radio server in Debian 8. It works well in CLI, but very slow after 
> starting GUI. I wonder whether it would be worth to try (if possible at 
> all) to upgrade it to Debian 9. Any experience with such old boxes?

Which WM or DE is your GUI running? Some use/need a lot more RAM than others. If
you want a full DE you might wish to try TDE, a fork of KDE3 initially created
when KDE went to version 4, 10 years ago. Its latest release is available for
Squeeze, Wheezy, Jesse, Stretch and Buster.
<https://wiki.trinitydesktop.org/Debian_Trinity_Repository_Installation_Instructions>
-- 
Evolution as taught in public schools, like religion,
	is based on faith, not on science.

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web