LMDE 201109 - Important INFO

[altair4]

Am I the only one that thinks this process is insane?

Look, I realize the LMDE isn't supposed to be for the average Linux user but shipping something and then telling folks not to update just seems incoherent. Then they have to look at another forum post to find out what their sources should be depending on the level of pain they are willing to tolerate just pushes things over the top.

There has to be a better way to present all this.

[Gerd50]

It's not only you altair. Update Pack 3 and the sources.list with multimedia and security sources tracking latest should have
been released in 201109. The LMDE forum is looking like a disturbed wasp nest atm.

[appye]

They didn't even have to rush the current incoming! They could have made the sources.list just point to the (currently non-existant) /latest/security and /latest/incoming repos ... it would have made a lot more sense. A few people reporting that the update manager on their brand new installation is complaining about repos not being found would have been the extent of it.

[craig10x]

I didn't know i wasn't supposed to do the update pack 2 when i installed the final iso....i assumed that it wouldn't be there if it wasn't supposed to utilized...
Now i have to worry about possible conflict even AFTER switching the sources list and updating with pack 3??? wonderful

Clem did say they were going to try to send the sources changes down automatically and are testing that now in fact...if it works i'd assume it will come with pack 3 but better double check before you actual DO the updates when it arrives...

[rhodry]

Am I the only one that thinks this process is insane?

Here we go again! "Nightmare On Mint Street Four".

Every time Clem tries to make life easier for people, there seems to be a flurry of "this is confusing for me and my hybrid??"

This is just my personal opinion - LMDE was and is (paraphrasing) a rolling release distribution based on Debian Testing repositories with Linuxmint enhancements. If you cannot handle a degree of self responsibility in respect to package management; DO NOT ENTER HERE! Go and install standard Mint.

A few users carried on about an APPARENT lack of stability in LMDE and this led to the introduction of Incoming/Latest v1 and now v2; and it has been nightmare after nightmare (workload wise) for the developers I bet. How much more unnecessary effort are we going to expect from Clem et al to something that is TOTALLY unnecessary.

I have been using LMDE (gnome &/or xfce) since day 1 of its release. I have done over 50 new installs of it at various dvd release points. Not one of those installs has needed to point to anything to do with Incoming/Latest. They point to a mirror of the Linuxmint Packages + a mirror of stock standard Debian Testing, Debian Security & Debian Multimedia. In my own install, I use apt pinning and access to (although not update through) the Debian Unstable repos to fix the odd glitch in Testing. I do not use MintUpdate at all; I do (minimum) weekly updates by:

$ sudo apt update && sudo apt-upgrade && sudo apt dist-upgrade in a terminal; then re-start X & occasionally reboot.

This machine ( in fact none of the ones I support) has not had one breakage nor downtime due to package management issues since install. I have had packages 'held' back from upgrade on occasion and a minor problem with library versions for a few days - that is 'par for the course' on a rolling distro and therefore the reason I know how to use Unstable safely!!

I dismay at the amount of time and resources being directed at this "stabilising" of LMDE for the sake of a few users who are either unable or unwilling to learn how to control a rolling Linux distribution. I can only imagine it is constantly drawing those precious resources away from more productive development of one of the best distros I know of.

I will happily post my apt/preferences file and sources.list if anyone wants.
I bet Clem has many days where he is saying "..if only I had taken the blue pill!!

rhodry.

[wyrdoak]

.
I bet Clem has many days where he is saying "..if only I had taken the blue pill!!

rhodry.

Makes you beleave in Pauli's theory of "measurement problem" in quantum mechanics.

EDIT: Or should it be Schrödinger's cat.

[craig10x]

what you seem to forget though, is Clem's goal is to make this debian testing distro as smooth, polished and reliable (like mint main edition) as he can, and help to minimize the need for the user to have to constantly fuss over it to keep it running that way...those of you who come from the debian background probably have a hard time understanding that because you are accustomed to it being the way it is...

What's wrong with trying to "tame debian" to a point that simplifies the use of a rolling distro...PcLinuxOs does that (they have few problems with it despite THAT being a rolling distro) because Texstar and his volunteers MAKE IT that way, so that it can be an easy to use rolling distro...

Is that such a terrible concept to you guys?
If it is...i really don't get it...

[bwat47]

I don't know why they didn't just make sure to release the ISO's AFTER bringing update pack 3 online (and released it with the new, proper, sources.list). I just saw the blog post advertising the new update pack feature, decided to give LMDE another try, installed it, and of course updated.

[rhodry]

what you seem to forget though, is Clem's goal is to make this debian testing distro as smooth, polished and reliable (like mint main edition) as he can, and help to minimize the need for the user to have to constantly fuss over it to keep it running that way...those of you who come from the debian background probably have a hard time understanding that because you are accustomed to it being the way it is...

What's wrong with trying to "tame debian" to a point that simplifies the use of a rolling distro...PcLinuxOs does that (they have few problems with it despite THAT being a rolling distro) because Texstar and his volunteers MAKE IT that way, so that it can be an easy to use rolling distro...

Is that such a terrible concept to you guys?
If it is...i really don't get it...

No craig, I understand just fine where Clem is coming from and what you are saying. I just think you are wrong. What I seriously question is the amount of effort being put into "taming" something that does not need "taming"! Why do we need to 'tame' Debian Testing? That already exists and it is called Debian Stable + Backports! If the goal is as you say, and Mint is ONLY for new or inexperienced users, then LMDE is using the wrong base.

Mepis (for example) uses a philosophy of Debian Stable + Community-based updates to give all the users who want "the most up-to-date" packages of certain software their wants; but, someone has to recompile against the older libraries and then package it up. They focus on KDE though, so LMDE maybe could be the GTK version of Mepis?

PCLinuxOS (damn fine system btw) has a totally different approach mainly because it had a totally different origin. I would not for a moment expect Clem to attempt to create his own repos from scratch using Debian sources. We're talking over 20,000 difference in total packages.

In Debian, Testing really is just a holding pen for the next Stable release. It is why "funny" things can happen. I have seen application developers just pull software out of there because they suddenly wanted to change something and re-run it through Unstable. Then you have the 'freeze' before next Stable release & subsequent 'flood' when it is done; which can all be very disruptive. This means Testing is only rolling for some of the time. Unstable is in fact the "real" Debian rolling release!

If someone does a bit of research before diving in though, all rolling releases can be readily controlled by the individual user. Copious amounts of effort by developers is not necessary. There are some fundamental strategies that apply in each case and people have to follow those rules. Don't do that and you are on your own. What's wrong with that?

I want Clem et al to work on Mint improvements and enhancements; new scripts, special functions, etc; the sorts of things that can differentiate us from the other distros; not spend all their time "taming" things that users could (and should IMHO) take care of themselves. Someone changes one source and all of a sudden another thread for developers to "fix".

Anyway, I did not intend this to become a 'rant'. I am sorry. This is just opinion stuff, not helping too many I suspect. I will withdraw to my cave.

rhodry.

[altair4]

Am I the only one that thinks this process is insane?

Here we go again! "Nightmare On Mint Street Four".

Every time Clem tries to make life easier for people, there seems to be a flurry of "this is confusing for me and my hybrid??"

This is just my personal opinion - LMDE was and is (paraphrasing) a rolling release distribution based on Debian Testing repositories with Linuxmint enhancements. If you cannot handle a degree of self responsibility in respect to package management; DO NOT ENTER HERE! Go and install standard Mint.

I realize that your post was meant to be dismissive and derogatory so my response may surprise you - I don't disagree with a word of it. In fact I would recommend that your comment in blue be up front and highlighted in the download page so that new users don't confuse any of the Debian based Mint's for something that they are not. They might want to reword it a tad to be sightly less harsh though

There is a reference on the download page that paraphrases your remarks but it's way down in item 4 of the FAQ's and let's face it most Linux users are men and we never read instructions

[craig10x]

rhodry...thank you for your explanation...we understood what you were getting at...Actually, with the concept of the "update packs" i think Clem's thought is that for those (there are many) who love the adventure and "tinkering" aspect of debian testing, will use LMDE either pointed to debian testing or "incoming"...

They are the ones who will hash out the updates, discover any problems, etc...so that when the "latest" update pack gets released, most of the problems have already "gone through the ringer" with the community and one will get a smoother experience (with solutions shown to any potential problems to make it much easy to solve without a zillion forum posts...lol)....

This is why update packs pointed to "latest" is now the default on LMDE...that way, less experienced linux users or those like me who have been using linux several years, have become pretty informed about it but still not as "technically" oriented as some here are, can enjoy it as well

You idea about debian stable with backports is interesting (perhaps it might eventually replace main edition)....
And maybe debian unstable would be better for LMDE....but i guess for some reason, Clem doesn't feel that way...

[Dave W.]

Hello everyone.
For what this is worth: I've read this post and Clem's Blog 2-3 times. I decided to use th KISS method.

Update Pack 2 and Update Pack 3:

This release comes with Update Pack 2 and points to the “Linux Mint Debian Latest” repository as well as the Debian “Security” and “Multimedia” repositories.

Starting with Update Pack 3, “Security” and “Multimedia” become part of “Linux Mint Debian Latest”. When Update Pack 3 is made available, your sources will need to change and all of them will then point at Linux Mint. In the meantime, it is recommended not to apply updates coming from “Security” and “Multimedia”, as they might not be compatible with the packages in Update Pack 2.

My take of this whole thing is that we should not accept any updates from Security and Mulitmedia as said by Clem and proxima_centauri. The simplest way to me would be to comment out those "stock" repos (see below), sit tight, be patient, and just wait for Update Pack 3. Further instructions will be available or be apparent.

deb http://packages.linuxmint.com/ debian main upstream import
deb http://debian.linuxmint.com/latest testing main contrib non-free
#deb http://security.debian.org/ testing/updates main contrib non-free
#deb http://www.debian-multimedia.org testing main non-free


When I did that, my updater had a lovely green check in it.

Dave

[proxima_centauri]

Too many people are posting their [specific] update errors and other breakage here. This thread was for informational purposes only. I have moved some posts into their own threads already

If you have a support issue related to the new repositories, please start your own thread. If you wish to give feedback concerning the update pack repositories, please do such in the "Update Packs Repositories" subforum.

*TOPIC LOCKED*

EDIT: I have received feedback that I reopen this thread. My main concern was a growing number of users posting specific questions better served in their own thread. I have thought about it, and decided that in interest of public discussion - I will unlock the thread for posting.

[rhodry]

I realize that your post was meant to be dismissive and derogatory....

I am very sorry if you got that impression or in fact if you thought it was personally intended. The quote was just used as a lead in to the point in the discussion. I would never intentionally post anything that was personally directed like that. I have, however, been told before that I am not the most subtle of conversationalists?!

I think I was getting frustrated at the volume of traffic in here that seems to keep going around and around in circles because people can't follow simple instructions; and I have very firm views on managing rolling releases; but it was not my intention to branch off into advocacy debates on the subject. I aplogise to the OP for branching away from a support topic. I will post no more on this matter.

rhodry.

[appye]

When I did that, my updater had a lovely green check in it.

With the sources.list I posted, it achieves the same result (green check), with the added benefit of transparently transitioning to update pack 3... I just wish this "final" release was released with the sources.list that it is supposed to have, minus the deb-src entries even. Many of these questions would have been avoided. Granted, there would be a bunch of "hey what is this error message I get when I refresh?" questions, but they would have all had the same simple answer: Just wait for update pack 3.

And in the interest of fanning the flames, I believe these mantras about not using mintupdate-debian, opting for the command line instead, and people should be doing that anyway, are missing the point. It seems pretty obvious to me that the lmde team is trying to reach a broader audience, namely 400 year old great aunts who just want to look up crochet lessons, AND their friends who love solitaire, online scrabble and heavy metal... Mintupdate-debian exists to be used, not to be ignored in favor of command line updates.

[Orographic]

I do agree with those that say you have to be more careful with Mint Debian. I usually install it then make a clonezilla image of my install before I do anything else with it. That way, I can easiy restore that image, if things go wrong. I did updates in the 32 bit version but have since installed the 64 bit version (supported all of my cores) and haven't done any updates.

I will keep reading this thread, to make sure I follow the best approach re updates.

[ferri]

It was so difficult to write in the first post like to correct sources.list?
But after studying all posts here I still do not have any idea how to correct my sources.list.

[twa]

Hi,
I understood that the sources.list need to be changed AFTER the release of the update pack 3 and only then
update the system. am I wrong ???

[M_aD]

This is how i understood it:

1: Install LMDE 201109

2: After the installation do NOT update and turn off the multimedia and security repo.

3: Wait until Update pack 3 is released and follow the instructions that might come with the announcement.

[craig10x]

Mr B is correct, that is how Clem explained it...only problem for me (and likely for others that didn't read that announcement before installing the final re-spin iso) is that i DID install the "update pack 2" and did not turn off the multimedia and security repos from debian testing....

Now i am concerned about possible problems AFTER resource lists are changed and "update pack 3" will be installed on my system...