This bug was fixed in the package rabbitmq-server - 1.7.2-1ubuntu1
---
rabbitmq-server (1.7.2-1ubuntu1) lucid; urgency=low
* debian/preinst, debian/rabbitmq-server.templates: Warn user about upgrading
from a really old version.
(LP: #506985)
* debian/control: Update maintaine
Untargeting for beta2 since this is not a supported ({hardy,karmic} ->
lucid) upgrade scenario.
** Changed in: rabbitmq-server (Ubuntu Lucid)
Milestone: ubuntu-10.04-beta-2 => None
--
Upgrade from rabbitmq-server 1.54 -> 1.7.0 wiped users and vhosts
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/506985
You
Sounds good to me, since 1.5.4 -> 1.7.0 will not be hit by normal
upgrade scenarios.
The message sounds wrong though:
Description: Upgrading from 1.5.4 and below.
You are upgrading from a release prior to 1.7.2.
I suspect you want:
Description: Upgrading from 1.5.4 and below.
You are upgradin
Scratch that, this would be a better idea.
** Attachment added: "debdiff"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/42581822/debdiff
--
Upgrade from rabbitmq-server 1.54 -> 1.7.0 wiped users and vhosts
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/506985
You received this bug notification because you are a member of U
I was thinking about something like the following
** Patch added: "warning.diff"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/42531908/warning.diff
--
Upgrade from rabbitmq-server 1.54 -> 1.7.0 wiped users and vhosts
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/506985
You received this bug notification because you are a
Soren,
This appears to be taking a very large sledgehammer for a smallish
problem. Maybe adding a note to the Debian.README and or release notes
to tell the users that this going to happen.
chuck
--
Upgrade from rabbitmq-server 1.54 -> 1.7.0 wiped users and vhosts
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bug
I also can't quite work out what the deal is with specifiying Breaks
against oneself. What I meant in option 1) was to version the binaries
(e.g. renaming it rabbitmq-server1.7) so that they're actual different
packages in which case the inter-package relationships seem more
sensible.
--
Upgrade
** Tags added: patch
--
Upgrade from rabbitmq-server 1.54 -> 1.7.0 wiped users and vhosts
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/506985
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
ht
** Also affects: rabbitmq-server (Ubuntu Lucid)
Importance: High
Status: Confirmed
--
Upgrade from rabbitmq-server 1.54 -> 1.7.0 wiped users and vhosts
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/506985
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed
** Changed in: rabbitmq-server (Ubuntu)
Milestone: None => ubuntu-10.04-beta-2
--
Upgrade from rabbitmq-server 1.54 -> 1.7.0 wiped users and vhosts
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/506985
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
I'm confused about how to do this, debian policy states that "A special
exception is made for packages which declare that they break their own
package name or a virtual package which they provide (see below): this
does not count as a real breakage.". http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-
policy/ch-rela
I can prepare a patch this weekend adding Breaks:
--
Elliot Murphy | https://launchpad.net/~statik/
On Jan 15, 2010 9:06 AM, "Soren Hansen" wrote:
I'm leaning towards option 1, since this actually reflects reality. Any
takers?
-- Upgrade from rabbitmq-server 1.54 -> 1.7.0 wiped users and vhos
I'm leaning towards option 1, since this actually reflects reality. Any
takers?
--
Upgrade from rabbitmq-server 1.54 -> 1.7.0 wiped users and vhosts
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/506985
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
-
** Changed in: rabbitmq-server (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Confirmed
--
Upgrade from rabbitmq-server 1.54 -> 1.7.0 wiped users and vhosts
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/506985
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubunt
In other words, this is expected, yet highly unfortunate behaviour.
We have a few options:
1. Version the binary packages and specify a Breaks: relationship between them.
2. Show a great big warning that this is going to happen.
3. Somehow pursuade upstream to provide a proper upgrade path.
--
Release notes from 1.7.0:
http://lists.rabbitmq.com/pipermail/rabbitmq-
discuss/attachments/20091007/3aaed239/attachment.txt
Quote:
Upgrading
=
The database schema has not changed since the 1.6.0 release, so user
accounts, durable exchanges and queues, and persistent messages
16 matches
Mail list logo
