27/06/14 18:38, intrigeri wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it would be good to decide something ASAP on this front, so that we
> can crash-test the supported procedure for 1.1~rc1. The input we need
> to make this decision is:
>
> * Who, among the core developers and those invited to run the manual
> test suite, has extra time to do these tests against 1.0.1+IUK on
> July 2, *in addition to* doing the 1.1~rc1 tests?
After releasing 1.1~rc1 on July 1, I will be almost completely AFK until
the summit. I guess I'd come back if 1.1~rc1 turns out to be completely
broken to prepare a 1.1~rc2, but I won't commit to any testing this
time, as I've said earlier.
> * Who, among the core developers and those invited to run the manual
> test suite, has extra time to do these tests against 1.0.1+IUK on
> July 21, *in addition to* doing the 1.1 tests?
I'll be present here, and could do it, if we decide to do this.
> If enough people can do that, then the "IUK way" can be an option, and
> likely the preferred one.
I am not completely convinced it is the "preferred" one. Even though our
UDFs can describe multiple upgrade paths (one full, one incremental), it
will only present one, and will prefer incremental ones. Hence all Tails
1.0.1 installations will get the suggestion to incrementally upgrade to
1.0.2 (or whatever we'll call it) which is just a waste of time if they
don't plan to use the "Upgrade from ISO" path. After all, the "real"
upgrade path from 1.0.1 to 1.1 will be a full (i.e. non-incremental)
upgrade to 1.1. Worse, some users may even think that they are
installing the 1.1 upgrade, and then get confused when they boot up
1.0.2 only to see the same security notice again, and a suggestion to do
a full upgrade to 1.1.
I think the key issue here is that the Tails Upgrader and IUKs are
designed around the idea that they provide "must have" upgrades, and
will only present one. For instance, there is no facility to show custom
messages in the UI (so we could explain that the upgrade is only
relevant for "Upgrade from ISO"), only a link (which some users won't
click). There are channels, of course, so I suppose we could create a
new channel for the 1.0.2 upgrade, but imho apt-get:ing the required
upgrades is easier both for us and our users.
To sum up, I don't think our Upgrader is designed for this, and I
foresee a potential user support nightmare if we try to force it to do
this any way.
> Else, I think we're back to where this thread was at on June 19, that
> is: either document the steps to install the new Tails Installer, or
> simply state that "Upgrade from ISO" is not supported from 1.0.1 to
> 1.1.
Since bugfix/7345-upgrade-from-iso-from-1.0-to-1.1 has been merged, and
the extra steps will be simple enough, I think we should support the
"Upgrade from ISO" path. However, to not taint the 1.0.1 APT suite
(which is frozen forever now!) I think we should create a new suite and
instruct our users to add that one. The final instructions would be:
1. Boot Tails 1.0.1
2. Enable admin password
3. Start a root shell and run:
echo "deb http://deb.tails.boum.org/ 1.0.1-to-1.1-upgrade main" > \
/etc/apt/sources.list.d/upgrade.list
apt-get update && apt-get install liveusb-creator syslinux
4. Proceed normally by starting Tails Installer and picking the
"Upgrade from ISO" option
Cheers!
