On 30/06/11 02:41, D G Teed wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 12:30 AM, Scott Ferguson > <prettyfly.producti...@gmail.com > <mailto:prettyfly.producti...@gmail.com>> wrote: > <snipped> > Yes I believe it was during the configuration stage > it had the X or gdm restart.�� One poster on here referenced > a prompt asking whether it was OK to restart gdm.
Both gdm and kdm "should" save app states.... > This isn't a production system so I wasn't paying careful > attention to whether it asked about that.� I was working > on something else in another window at the time. > It may have warned gdm would be restarted and I just > said go ahead without reading it - as it usually prompts for > this for services impacted by for example pam updates > and I'm never concerned about restarting those services. > > Unfortunately I can't reproduce this and watch more carefully. Which means I should have a good think about ways to set up logging of peoples upgrade process (if they don't already exist). I have a vested interest in Debian being a desktop in industry, and even if you were the only person to experience a problem - the experience would be instructive. It's good timing - I usually donate some time or money to FOSS at the start of each financial year. Already got locking out vt access as part of kiosk setting on the list. > > Later when X was restarted and I redid aptitude safe-upgrade, > it showed about a dozen packages awaiting configuration and > another dozen or so to install.� I would have taken better notes > if I thought this was a bug but I thought it was just me > not taking the precautions I should.� All I have as a record > is /var/log/aptitude and it doesn't show failures or aborts. Do you have a list of the packages upgraded? > > > Despite testing on a number of different Gnome and KDE desktops we saw > no problems with the upgrade - with the exception of a lack of a hint in > the Samba upgrade message on how to exit the message. Users were advised > how to exit that screen. > > > I did see the samba notification and read it.� I remember > that happening.� Less is already known to me as the pager > so no surprises there. A surprising number of people got stuck because the samba message "assumed" user's knew about less (and more). Though I'm not blaming the samba crew, or the debian maintainers - it's clearly something I could have fixed myself. > > Yes, I was watching the list to see if anyone else was bitten and saw > none.� Perhaps my system was an oddball.� It is an Atom 230 > based system. > Shouldn't make a difference (in a perfect world). Thanks for the additional info. One thought that occurs to me is - maybe a mechanism to test the updated state of a system *before* applying a point release might be useful - as point releases are normally tested on fully upgraded systems. Cheers -- "This is where we are at right now, as a whole. No one is left out of the loop. We are experiencing a reality based on a thin veneer of lies and illusions. A world where greed is our God and wisdom is sin, where division is key and unity is fantasy, where the ego-driven cleverness of the mind is praised, rather than the intelligence of the heart." ~ Bill Hicks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e0beefe.1010...@gmail.com
