On Wed, Mar 14, 2001 at 05:40:29PM +0000, Martin WHEELER wrote: > On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > > > I've had to suffer this one - providing telephone support and advice over > > a week plus to an old and valued friend :) [Hi Martin :) ] > > [Hi, Andy! Just about to put this one to the list but you beat me to > it.] > > <WHINGEING RANT>
[ much ranting ] > I CANNOT recommend this type of upgrade to any of my clients. [ more ranting ] _Why_ would you ever suggest to a client that they upgrade to testing? Testing and unstable are intended to be run by people who know what they are doing. It sounds like most of your clients don't qualify. It sounds like you got bit by some perl dependency screwup. If I were you I would have looked at "remove 402 packages" and said "Hmm, think I'll wait on this a bit". As far as the apache configs being overwritten ... I think we are still missing some info here. Apache upgrades have always worked flawlessly here. It sounds to my like you had apache-perl installed, purged it (wiping out your configs - I think I saw this happen once and swore of apache-perl in favor of apache + mod_perl). Then apache was installed, no configs were present so it installed the default bofh configs. I won't comment on the security issues presented by the old config style vs. the new; it's your server. (I can't resist ... I like the new configs. They make sense, but then again I'm a paranoid person). Cheers, -- Nathan Norman - Staff Engineer | A good plan today is better Micromuse Inc. | than a perfect plan tomorrow. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Patton
pgpMW5Rz4AVvK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
