Active Topics
-
The N900 is now 15 years old! (9)
to Nokia N900 by Arno_11 - 14 hrs, 6 mins ago -
Sailfish OS for the Motorola Moto G7 Power (XT1955-5) - (ocean) (4)
to SailfishOS by Maemish - 6 days, 2 hrs ago - more...
iTab |
2008-10-17
, 03:28
|
|
Posts: 233 |
Thanked: 17 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
|
#501
|
How can I go back to the previous version?
 |
|
2008-10-17
, 04:57
|
|
Posts: 4,930 |
Thanked: 2,272 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
|
#502
|
Reflash to the original Diablo and upgrade only to the point you want (easy), or go through manually adjusting repositories to old SSU versions and downgrading packages (harder).
__________________
World's first inductively-charged N900!
World's first inductively-charged N900!
|
|
2008-10-17
, 08:02
|
|
Posts: 54 |
Thanked: 11 times |
Joined on Feb 2008
|
#503
|
Well, for what it's worth, I couldn't get a reliable upgrade until I did the following:
1. Backup (using bundled Backup tool)
2. Re-flash.
3. Update (multiple times until you have the latest Diablo)
4. Restore from backup.
Seems to work...but what a pain!
- Jim
1. Backup (using bundled Backup tool)
2. Re-flash.
3. Update (multiple times until you have the latest Diablo)
4. Restore from backup.
Seems to work...but what a pain!
- Jim
| The Following User Says Thank You to macr0t0r For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2008-10-17
, 12:23
|
|
Posts: 273 |
Thanked: 104 times |
Joined on Mar 2007
@ Manitoba, Canada
|
#504
|
Folks:
I don't know how many others are in the same boat as I am -- I have held off installing the latest upgrade in hopes that an easy way will be explained how to *avoid* problems, or (better yet) that a newer version will follow which will be *risk-free*. Are either of these scenarios realistic?
I don't know how many others are in the same boat as I am -- I have held off installing the latest upgrade in hopes that an easy way will be explained how to *avoid* problems, or (better yet) that a newer version will follow which will be *risk-free*. Are either of these scenarios realistic?
|
|
2008-10-17
, 13:04
|
|
Posts: 233 |
Thanked: 17 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
|
#505
|
Originally Posted by macr0t0r
How do I "Re-Flash" to a prior version? Do I get it from a link somewhere and then install it via a wire to my PC?
Well, for what it's worth, I couldn't get a reliable upgrade until I did the following:
1. Backup (using bundled Backup tool)
2. Re-flash.
3. Update (multiple times until you have the latest Diablo)
4. Restore from backup.
Seems to work...but what a pain!
- Jim
Then, how do I "update multiple times to have the latest Diablo"...?
Then, how do I "restore from backup"...?
I have a folder in my memory of a "backup" - can't I just activate that somehow?
|
|
2008-10-17
, 13:56
|
|
Posts: 227 |
Thanked: 53 times |
Joined on Feb 2008
@ Lyon, France
|
#506
|
Originally Posted by iTab
Look at the wiki. It will necessarily be a previous version.
How do I "Re-Flash" to a prior version? Do I get it from a link somewhere and then install it via a wire to my PC?
Originally Posted by iTab
With the Application Manager or apt-get.
Then, how do I "update multiple times to have the latest Diablo"...?
Originally Posted by iTab
In my case, this was proposed automatically.
Then, how do I "restore from backup"...?
| The Following User Says Thank You to vinc17 For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2008-10-17
, 14:08
|
|
Posts: 233 |
Thanked: 17 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
|
#507
|
Originally Posted by vinc17
OK, so I do the re-flash with that link's instructions.
Look at the wiki. It will necessarily be a previous version.
With the Application Manager or apt-get.
In my case, this was proposed automatically.
Then, I go to the Application Manager and refresh for updates?
That's it? It will go back to the previous version or it will access and go back to my back-up?
|
|
2008-10-17
, 15:33
|
|
Posts: 227 |
Thanked: 53 times |
Joined on Feb 2008
@ Lyon, France
|
#508
|
Originally Posted by iTab
After the reflash, you'll get the first Diablo version, and after the first reboot, the system will propose you to restore the backup. Then you can use the Application Manager to do any update, including the SSU ones (I don't remember under what name they appear, but it is quite clear). Note that at this time, only the first SSU will be proposed; if you want the latest SSU, you need to install the first one, then it will ask you to reboot, and after the reboot, use the Application Manager again, refresh for updates again, and the second SSU will be proposed. Just install it...
OK, so I do the re-flash with that link's instructions.
Then, I go to the Application Manager and refresh for updates?
That's it? It will go back to the previous version or it will access and go back to my back-up?
| The Following User Says Thank You to vinc17 For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2008-10-17
, 16:00
|
|
Posts: 54 |
Thanked: 11 times |
Joined on Feb 2008
|
#509
|
So...I realize I'm preaching to the choir...but why are they doing this screwball combined-package update? The whole point of the lovely apt-get utility is to manage dependencies. As far as I'm concerned, the system update should just be a simple script with a bunch of dependencies for updated versions of modest, microb, etc. It would certainly make things far less draconian when doing a fresh flash install versus having to do multiple combined-package updates with reboots in-between. I rather like being able to sym-link certain User folders to my SD card, and I don't want to have to keep a bunch of foreign user-guides (rumored as possible causes for the update failures...I had done both). They're blunder has made me forever gun-shy on future updates.
However, now that they have made this mess, will future updates DEPEND on this unified package? They've sort of dug themselves a hole here. Whoever bundled this thing does not seem too knowledgeable about why apt-get exists and how to use it.
Perhaps I'm missing something. Is there a Maemo repository that DOES host all the Diablo applications and libraries where a person could update without a unified package. If not...why not?
- Jim
However, now that they have made this mess, will future updates DEPEND on this unified package? They've sort of dug themselves a hole here. Whoever bundled this thing does not seem too knowledgeable about why apt-get exists and how to use it.
Perhaps I'm missing something. Is there a Maemo repository that DOES host all the Diablo applications and libraries where a person could update without a unified package. If not...why not?
- Jim
|
|
2008-10-17
, 18:16
|
|
Posts: 4,930 |
Thanked: 2,272 times |
Joined on Oct 2007
|
#510
|
Originally Posted by macr0t0r
They're coming at this from "the way we've always done it" with cellphone firmware, and are trying to use the Debian package infrastructure implement the same approach of updating everything at once, and making sure the entire system is in a known state first. (This method avoids the assumption that packages are independent.)
So...I realize I'm preaching to the choir...but why are they doing this screwball combined-package update? The whole point of the lovely apt-get utility is to manage dependencies. As far as I'm concerned, the system update should just be a simple script with a bunch of dependencies for updated versions of modest, microb, etc. It would certainly make things far less draconian when doing a fresh flash install versus having to do multiple combined-package updates with reboots in-between. I rather like being able to sym-link certain User folders to my SD card, and I don't want to have to keep a bunch of foreign user-guides (rumored as possible causes for the update failures...I had done both). They're blunder has made me forever gun-shy on future updates.
However, now that they have made this mess, will future updates DEPEND on this unified package? They've sort of dug themselves a hole here. Whoever bundled this thing does not seem too knowledgeable about why apt-get exists and how to use it.
Perhaps I'm missing something. Is there a Maemo repository that DOES host all the Diablo applications and libraries where a person could update without a unified package. If not...why not?
- Jim
Of course, that assumption is avoided in a better way with dpkg; packages specify their interdependencies, so any package can be upgraded in isolation, or with updates of any associated components. But they're not used to that idea, yet.
I think we're stuck with the current situation for Diablo. (I've heard that Fremantle will be different WRT updates; not sure what it will be, but hopefully just normal packages in a repository.)
__________________
World's first inductively-charged N900!
World's first inductively-charged N900!
