This is just a story I wanted to share about why upgrading to sidux is dangerous. I decided to install the new previous of AntiX (7.02) on a machine and then dist-upgrade to sid. I followed the instructions in another thread (enabling all non-sid repositories, dist-upgrade, reboot, enable sid repositories, reboot).

Upon the first reboot, with the new sid system, my system refused to boot: It gave me an error that it could not mount the VFS system. I figured this might be due to a libc6/kernel mismatch or a problem with the default kernel install of MEPIS, which does not use an initrd. Thus, I booted up the livecd, chrooted in, and installed the latest sidux kernel.

New error: the root device /dev/sda1 cannot be found. I'm dropped into a busybox shell from the initrd, so I switch to UUID tags. No go. Finally, I switch to /dev/hda1 (which is deprecated) and it finally works. However, fstab still uses the old naming, so fsck chokes on booting. I finally boot into single-user and fix the problems.

I hope this is helpful to anyone who has trouble booting the old or new kernels after upgrading to sid.

Thanks for the warnings and the solution.

Just asking for a bit of clarification.

Do you mean sidux upgrade or sid upgrade?

The sidux repo shouldn't have been left in preview1 and it certainly won't be in the final. The sid repos will be there, but commented out.

I mean sidux. But the VFS error that prevents the mepis kernel from booting was present when I did another test with only the sid kernel.

infinitycircuit wrote:This is just a story I wanted to share about why upgrading to sidux is dangerous.

[...]


I hope this is helpful to anyone who has trouble booting the old or new kernels after upgrading to sid.

As you're using sid/sidux interchangeably I doubt you really know the difference. For reference:


========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://www.debian.org/releases/unstable/"
linktext was:"Sid"
====================================
vs
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://sidux.com/"
linktext was:"Sidux"
====================================


the former's a debian release (I'm gathering that's the guide you're referring to) , the latter's a debian-based distribution.

anticapitalista wrote:Thanks for the warnings and the solution.

Just asking for a bit of clarification.

Do you mean sidux upgrade or sid upgrade?

The sidux repo shouldn't have been left in preview1 and it certainly won't be in the final. The sid repos will be there, but commented out.

anti, the sidux repos were in preview1, although they were commented out, because i enable them by mistake, and then disabled them again after you informed me that it could cause probems. __{{emoticon}}__

DJiNN wrote:

anticapitalista wrote:Thanks for the warnings and the solution.

Just asking for a bit of clarification.

Do you mean sidux upgrade or sid upgrade?

The sidux repo shouldn't have been left in preview1 and it certainly won't be in the final. The sid repos will be there, but commented out.

anti, the sidux repos were in preview1, although they were commented out, because i enable them by mistake, and then disabled them again after you informed me that it could cause probems. __{{emoticon}}__

Hmm, I am going to have to take a look at that! I LOVE sidux. I find it does a great job protecting me from the perils of Debian Sid, providing me with a cutting edge distro that actually works.

Anticapitalista has mentioned, over at the USALUG, that he has been experimenting with sidux in some of his stuff. I believe I have a copy of preview 1.

masinick wrote:

DJiNN wrote:

anticapitalista wrote:Thanks for the warnings and the solution.

Just asking for a bit of clarification.

Do you mean sidux upgrade or sid upgrade?

The sidux repo shouldn't have been left in preview1 and it certainly won't be in the final. The sid repos will be there, but commented out.

anti, the sidux repos were in preview1, although they were commented out, because i enable them by mistake, and then disabled them again after you informed me that it could cause probems. __{{emoticon}}__

Hmm, I am going to have to take a look at that! I LOVE sidux. I find it does a great job protecting me from the perils of Debian Sid, providing me with a cutting edge distro that actually works.

Anticapitalista has mentioned, over at the USALUG, that he has been experimenting with sidux in some of his stuff. I believe I have a copy of preview 1.

I'd be interested to know what you think & how you find it if you get the time. I enabled them by mistake when i installed preview 1, and then when anti mentioned that they may be problematic, i disable them again. LOL! I don't mind taking risks, but i'm not that good yet, and if it breaks i probably can't fix it. __{{emoticon}}__

But i am running 3 antiX systems here (on 3 different machines) two using Deb testing & one running sid, and all are running fine.

You mentioned the"Perils of sid"? What do you mean by that? __{{emoticon}}__ I thought (Probably mistakenly) that sid & Sidux used the same (or similar) repos/releases etc?

If they're just as safe/fragile/unstable as sid, then i may as well use Sidux & see what happens. Hmmm, maybe ANOTHER antiX install is calling!? __{{emoticon}}__