Re: [lmi] Debian buster changed its 'Version' value

[Vadim Zeitlin]

On Mon, 9 Sep 2019 17:49:44 +0000 Greg Chicares <address@hidden> wrote:

GC> Vadim--Now that 'buster' is the stable debian release, I've
GC> installed it (from scratch, on its own partition).
GC> 
GC> $cat /etc/debian_version 
GC> 10.0
GC> 
GC> Today I happened to reboot it, so I figured I may as well do
GC> an update and upgrade. I was surprised by the message on the
GC> last line:
GC> 
GC> #apt-get update
GC> ...
GC> Reading package lists... Done
GC> N: Repository 'http://deb.debian.org/debian buster InRelease' changed its 
'Version' value from '10.0' to '10.1'
GC> 
GC> I've never seen anything like that before,

 I haven't seen it neither, although I've been running "apt-get update" at
least since Potato... All I can say that I did see it after just running
"apt update" here, so at least it's indeed something due to the changes in
the repository and not a local problem:

N: Repository 'http://ftp.fr.debian.org/debian buster InRelease' changed its 
'Version' value from '10.0' to '10.1'

(note the different mirror being used).

GC> even though I had upgraded 'stretch' from 9.0 through successive
GC> versions through 9.11 . Let me emphasize that I haven't upgraded the
GC> 'Suite' (e.g., from 'testing' to 'stable'): this is a fresh
GC> installation from a 'debian-10.0.0-amd64-DVD-1.iso' image.
GC> 
GC> What should I do about this?
GC> 
GC> (1) Ignore the message and forge blithely ahead?

 I think that this is indeed the right thing to do. I don't know why has
this behaviour changed and whether it happened on the client or server
side. I suspect that it could be the former one, i.e. the repository
version may have changed before as well, but old versions of apt[-get]
simply didn't warn about it, while the new one used in Buster does. In any
case, there doesn't seem to be anything to be really done about it: the
version has changed and, presumably, will change again in the future, but
this doesn't prevent anybody from upgrading Buster systems.

GC> (I'm guessing that the "N: " prefix means "iNformational".)

(My guess would be that "N:" stands for "Note:", but maybe this just
denotes my lack of lateral thinking)

GC> (2) Explicitly allow 'Version' upgrades?
GC> 
GC> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=929248#20
GC> | Probably, a new Debian Stable release has happened as you tried to
GC> | update your system.  If this is the case, please update "Release-Notes"
GC> | field by executing "sudo apt-get --allow-releaseinfo-change update".

 I don't think "Version" change is as drastic as "Suite" name change and I
don't think it requires any special action to be allowed. Also, rerunning
"apt update" again, I don't get the warning/note any more, so it looks like
it has been taken into account without any additional actions on my part.

GC> (3) Switch to 'apt'?

 As the example above shows, this wouldn't have changed anything in this
particular case.

GC> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=929248#30
GC> | You're not supposed to be using apt-get, use apt.
GC> 
GC> Really? (I thought they were recommending 'aptitude'.)

 No, aptitude isn't recommended since a long time (since Jessie?) any more.
The other 2 are equivalent, except apt is supposed to be the new and shiny
interactive tool, while apt-get remains the old and stable lower level
driver. This is the theory, anyhow. In practice, they're almost
indistinguishable and both use the same library underneath in any case.

 FWIW, normally I use apt rather than apt-get nowadays just because it's
shorter. I still use "apt-get autoremove --purge" because apt doesn't
provide "--purge" option for "autoremove" (and I never want to keep the old
config files because I use etckeeper and so their old memories are kept in
Git anyhow) and "aptitude why" or "why-not" sometimes because apt doesn't
provide this functionality (AFAIK), but otherwise apt works just as well.

GC> Below is '/etc/apt/sources.list'. Its first active line:
GC>   deb http://deb.debian.org/debian/ buster main non-free contrib
GC> looks very much like those on older partitions, e.g.:
GC>   deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ stretch main non-free contrib
GC>   deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ wheezy main
GC> (i.e., I've never previously written 'stable' there).

 This is definitely a good thing. And your sources.list file looks
perfectly fine to me.

 Regards,
VZ

pgpFiLYTd0E8K.pgp
Description: PGP signature