[Users] Issues with kernel upgrade on Debian Wheezy

Wed Mar 26 21:06:33 PDT 2014

I can confirm there is an issue in upgrading on wheezy (stable).

It uses linux-image-openvz-amd64                          042+1 instead of
the regular version and generates /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.32-openvz-amd64 instead
of the prefixed version, i.e.:
/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.32-openvz-042stab084.17-amd64

Could you guy look into it and fix it completely, so upgrades will go fine
and not break anything?

2014-03-26 21:21 GMT+04:00 Narcis Garcia <informatica at actiu.net>:

> These may be alternatives for version numbering (I've tested them with
> dpkg --compare-versions):
>
> As a complete upstream version:
> 42.85.20
> Combining old and new schema:
> 042+stab085.20
>
>
> El 26/03/14 17:07, Roman Haefeli ha escrit:
> > On Mon, 2014-03-24 at 09:40 -0700, Kir Kolyshkin wrote:
> >> Thank you for detailed position. I have already rolled back to the old
> >> versioning scheme,
> >> please check packages in wheezy-test and let me know if anything is
> >> wrong there.
> >
> > Things look pretty good in wheezy-test. Thanks for the work.
> >
> > Two minor issues:
> >
> > * There is still no changelog of the kernel in the package (or
> >   I cannot find it, usually it goes to something like:
> >
> /usr/share/doc/linux-image-2.6.32-openvz-042stab085.20-amd64/changelog.Debian.gz
> >
> > * The version of the meta package linux-image-openvz-amd64 is higher
> >   (042+1) in wheezy than in wheezy-test (042stab085.20). When switching
> >   from wheezy to wheezy-test, one has to remove and re-install the
> >   package linux-image-openvz-amd64 in order to automatically install the
> >   newest kernel packagelinux-image-2.6.32-openvz-042stab085.20-amd64
> >
> > I'm not sure how to resolve the latter problem or whether it should be
> > addressed at all (switching from wheezy to wheezy-test can considered to
> > be one time thing). However, once the the current wheezy-test
> > linux-image-openvz-amd64  goes to wheezy, there is a problem because you
> > cannot downgrade packages. Either the version needs to be bumped with an
> > epoch version [1] like 1:042stab085.20 (ugly) or the versioning scheme
> > needs to be adapted (perhaps also ugly), but how? I can't think of a
> > truly satisfying solution right now.
> >
> > [1]
> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Version
> >
> >
> > Roman
> >
> >
> >> On 03/24/2014 09:04 AM, Roman Haefeli wrote:
> >>> Hi all, Ola
> >>>
> >>> I followed the recent discussion about OpenVZ kernel package management
> >>> for Debian. While I don't really have a qualified opinion on the
> subject
> >>> matter (personally, I slightly tend towards a new package for each
> >>> release), let me mention problems with the current situation:
> >>>
> >>> * 'uname -r' does not print the actual version (This already has
> >>>    been mentioned in the other thread)
> >>>
> >>> * If there is a problem with a kernel update, I cannot easily revert
> >>>    to the previous version. At our institution, we experienced cases
> >>>    where a switch to the previous kernel because of a bug was
> necessary.
> >>>
> >>> * I'm trying to upgrade a machine right now from version 042stab084.26
> >>>    to newest 042stab085.17. I do:
> >>>
> >>>    $ apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade
> >>>
> >>>    and I'm prompted with the following dialog:
> >>>
> >>>    $  Configuring linux-image-2.6.32-openvz-amd64
> >>>    $  -------------------------------------------
> >>>    $
> >>>    $  You are attempting to install a kernel image (version
> 2.6.32-openvz-amd64) However, the directory
> /lib/modules/2.6.32-openvz-amd64/kernel still exists.  If this directory
> belongs to a previous linux-image-2.6.32-openvz-amd64
> >>>    $  package, and if you have deselected some modules, or installed
> standalone modules packages, this could be bad.
> >>>    $
> >>>    $  If /lib/modules/2.6.32-openvz-amd64/kernel belongs to an old
> install of linux-image-2.6.32-openvz-amd64, then this is your last chance
> to abort the installation of this kernel image (nothing has been changed
> yet).
> >>>    $
> >>>    $  If you know what you are doing, and if you feel that this image
> should be installed despite this anomaly, Please answer n to the question.
> >>>    $
> >>>    $  Otherwise, I suggest you move
> /lib/modules/2.6.32-openvz-amd64/kernel out of the way, perhaps to
> /lib/modules/2.6.32-openvz-amd64.kernel.old or something, and then try
> re-installing this image.
> >>>    $
> >>>    $  Stop install since the kernel-image is already installed?
> >>>
> >>>    If Debian does in-place kernel upgrades (a.k.a keeping the package
> >>>    name while upgrading the kernel), they managed to never bother the
> >>>    user with a question like this. I certainly know too little about
> >>>    kernel package management to be of any help,  but to me that dialog
> >>>    indicates that something is still odd.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Those issues might be solved while sticking to the in-place upgrade
> >>> scheme and are not necessarily an argument against it. I just wanted to
> >>> mention them.
> >>>
> >>> Ranting aside, I am more than happy to see someone puts the effort into
> >>> making all the great OpenVZ software easily accessible for Debian
> >>> systems. For Debian, the situation has never been better before. Thanks
> >>> a lot for that work.
> >>>
> >>> Roman
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Users mailing list
> >>> Users at openvz.org
> >>> https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Users mailing list
> > Users at openvz.org
> > https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at openvz.org
> https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openvz.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20140327/b6ea3cac/attachment.html>