Nic wrote:
> I tried to upgrade from LM 19.1 to LM19.3 in order to consider the
> upgrade to LM 20, but I got a failure.

I don't understand why that should happen.

--
Mike Easter

On 2/3/23 3:37 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
> Nic wrote:
>> I tried to upgrade from LM 19.1 to LM19.3 in order to consider the
>> upgrade to LM 20, but I got a failure.
>
> I don't understand why that should happen.
>
Neither do I. I followed all the steps and the upgrade from 19.1 to 19.3
came up with some kind of error. It is my understanding that in order to
upgrade from 19 to 20, LM19.3 must be installed.

Nic wrote:
> Could you elaborate what  security issues would occur if a person
> continued to use LM19 past April.

No; I am not capable of predicting the security problems of LM19 in the
future; I don't even know if there are significant security issues w/
using 19.1 instead of 19.3.

I have used 'all kinds of things' Win OS, browsers, LM 17 in the past,
past their support lives. But that doesn't mean that the practice is wise.

I try to 'minimize' how much unsupported stuff I use. It seems to me
that you should be able to use LM 20 w/o too much trouble. Maybe you
should start a thread about any problems you are having getting from
19.1 to 19.3.

LM 19.1 to 19.3 is considered a 'minor' upgrade. LM 19.3 to LM 20 is
considered a major upgrade. LM 20 to 20.3 is minor.

This table shows links to the tutorials for all of those:
https://linuxmint-user-guide.readthedocs.io/en/latest/upgrade.html
> The table below shows the upgrade paths between the various Linux Mint releases.

--
Mike Easter

Nic wrote:
> I followed all the steps and the upgrade from 19.1 to 19.3 came up with
> some kind of error. It is my understanding that in order to upgrade from
> 19 to 20, LM19.3 must be installed.

Correct. Why don't you start a thread which contains a paste from your
error 19.1>19.3

https://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=3838
> How to upgrade to Linux Mint 19.3

--
Mike Easter

On 2/3/23 3:54 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
> Nic wrote:
>> I followed all the steps and the upgrade from 19.1 to 19.3 came up
>> with some kind of error. It is my understanding that in order to
>> upgrade from 19 to 20, LM19.3 must be installed.
>
> Correct.  Why don't you start a thread which contains a paste from
> your error 19.1>19.3
>
> https://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=3838
>> How to upgrade to Linux Mint 19.3
>
>
>
I did not save the error information, due to me frustration that things
did not go smoothly. Perhaps I will try it again when fresh in the morning.

On 2/3/23 3:49 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
> Nic wrote:
>> Could you elaborate what  security issues would occur if a person
>> continued to use LM19 past April.
>
> No; I am not capable of predicting the security problems of LM19 in
> the future; I don't even know if there are significant security issues
> w/ using 19.1 instead of 19.3.
>
> I have used 'all kinds of things' Win OS, browsers, LM 17 in the past,
> past their support lives.  But that doesn't mean that the practice is
> wise.
>
> I try to 'minimize' how much unsupported stuff I use.  It seems to me
> that you should be able to use LM 20 w/o too much trouble. Maybe you
> should start a thread about any problems you are having getting from
> 19.1 to 19.3.
>
> LM 19.1 to 19.3 is considered a 'minor' upgrade.  LM 19.3 to LM 20 is
> considered a major upgrade.  LM 20 to 20.3 is minor.
>
> This table shows links to the tutorials for all of those:
> https://linuxmint-user-guide.readthedocs.io/en/latest/upgrade.html
>> The table below shows the upgrade paths between the various Linux
>> Mint releases.
>
>
>
Maybe this is a whole lot of booga booga mysterious scare threat because
there is some little man behind the curtain that is yelling at you
saying it is unsupported.   I hear anecdotally that there are many
people who use an outdated os, look at all those holdouts who are using
windows xp and 7, and maybe there are some who still use w95. I am
reminded of an old saying 'if it is not broken, don't fix it'.

Nic wrote:
> Maybe this is a whole lot of booga booga mysterious scare threat
> because there is some little man behind the curtain that is yelling
> at you saying it is unsupported.

The 'truth is' that it IS unsupported. The 'significance' of that
depends on whether or not it occurs that a security problem causes you harm.

> I hear anecdotally that there are many people who use an outdated os,
> look at all those holdouts who are using windows xp and 7,

That is correct. I just said that I have done that; and also some w/ LM
17.3 in the past.

> and maybe there are some who still use w95.

That is probably /less/ 'dangerous' than using such as XP and its old
browser. Browsing might be 'hard' to do w/ W95.

> I am reminded of an old saying 'if it is not broken, don't fix it'.

The problem w/ that old saw in this context is that 'we' aren't actually
smart enough to know how 'broken' any particular unsupported LM 19.1 is,
and whether or not that 'weakness' will cause us any harm or not. Or
even how to avoid the risks that its lack of security updates lead to.

The evolution of your distro is not there to cause you 'trouble' -- it
is there to help you, not hurt you.

--
Mike Easter

On 2/3/2023 4:20 PM, Nic wrote:
> On 2/3/23 3:49 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
>> Nic wrote:
>>> Could you elaborate what  security issues would occur if a person continued to use LM19 past April.
>>
>> No; I am not capable of predicting the security problems of LM19 in the future; I don't even know if there are significant security issues w/ using 19.1 instead of 19.3.
>>
>> I have used 'all kinds of things' Win OS, browsers, LM 17 in the past, past their support lives.  But that doesn't mean that the practice is wise.
>>
>> I try to 'minimize' how much unsupported stuff I use.  It seems to me that you should be able to use LM 20 w/o too much trouble. Maybe you should start a thread about any problems you are having getting from 19.1 to 19.3.
>>
>> LM 19.1 to 19.3 is considered a 'minor' upgrade.  LM 19.3 to LM 20 is considered a major upgrade.  LM 20 to 20.3 is minor.
>>
>> This table shows links to the tutorials for all of those:
>> https://linuxmint-user-guide.readthedocs.io/en/latest/upgrade.html
>>> The table below shows the upgrade paths between the various Linux Mint releases.
>>
>>
>>
> Maybe this is a whole lot of booga booga mysterious scare threat because there is some little man behind the curtain that is yelling at you saying it is unsupported.   I hear anecdotally that there are many people who use an outdated os, look at all those holdouts who are using windows xp and 7, and maybe there are some who still use w95. I am reminded of an old saying 'if it is not broken, don't fix it'.
>

The W95 operator, has only the one program they use.
It runs a CNC machine and makes metal parts. The standards
involved, and the functions, they never change. The only thing
they have to worry about in life, is a hardware failure.

Now, take you. You want to use a web browser. The web browser
standards keep changing, and asshole web coders break web pages
on purpose, if they check your browser release and it is "too old".
You can live on your little island... as long as you never use
the Internet again :-) Neat, eh ?

First, construct your mission statement. Here's mine:

"I wanna do stuff and I wanna do stuff NOW"

OK, how do I translate that mission statement into
a series of procedures ? After doing the calculus,
this is the answer.

"This will take an upgrade"

We're pragmatic (practical) people out here. When
my plumbing breaks here, I get a wrench and I fix it.
I don't sit here and listen to the dripping, and
lament the invention of Chinese water torture.

Some of us have been through EOL distros, tried to
do private tool builds to work around them, and realized
it just wasn't worth it. I can and have built my own
Firefox, more than once. Do I look forward to that ?
Not really.

Paul

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 2023-02-03, Big Al wrote:
> Why do your PGP sign your message posts?

Force of habit; had some trolls faking being me for a bit some years
back. Do it with emails/mailing lists as well.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=1dir
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: DDAB 23FB 19FA 7D85 1CC1 E067 6D65 70E5 4CE7 2860

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 2023-02-03, Nic wrote:
> On 2/3/23 9:43 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
>> On 2023-02-03, Nic wrote:
>>> I booted the LM 20 version and OSMO has the contacts tab. I guess my
>>> next question is, the version 19 of LM that I am using is only supported
>>> until April 2023, is there any chance that the kernel will be updated at
>>> some later date? Or can I use a kernel intended for LM20 or LM21 in LM19?
>> No, "End Of Life" means exactly that. The release is _dead_ in April.
>>
>> You _MUST_ move to a version that is still supported. LM20 is supported
>> until 2025; LM21 is supported until 2027.
>>
> Are you saying that it will _stop_ working?
>

I am saying it will _stop_ receiving updates. Whether or not you choose
to use an Operating System that is not maintained security-wise after
that date is on you.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=VmWj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: DDAB 23FB 19FA 7D85 1CC1 E067 6D65 70E5 4CE7 2860

Dan Purgert wrote:
>
> Big Al wrote:
>> Why do your PGP sign your message posts?
>
> Force of habit; had some trolls faking being me for a bit some years
> back.
>
Example of an alternative strategy:

Your NSP eternal-september allows you to configure an e-s FQDN w/ your
account, which 'signature' condition can appear in your M-ID and other
lines in the e-s message header, including the Path making it
'impossible' for someone to 'forge' your messages (without being detected).

Your news agent is currently configured to stamp is own M-ID, but that
part can be easily forged by anyone w/ a free e-s account, such as using
slrn agent.

Since you use a valid email address, NSPs have historically 'enforced'
against anyone forging your email; ie e-s would kill the account of
someone forging your From email.

It is highly unlikely that anyone reading your msg/s in this group holds
your public key or uses a tool to confirm your pgp clearsigning.

I have, in the past, as a matter of 'interest', but I have since
'de-rigged' that feature of my news agent.

e-s says:
> The e-mail addresses given in "From:", "Reply-To:", and "Sender:"
> SHOULD be yours (i.e. you should be entitled to use it) and SHOULD be
> valid (= should not bounce because of invalidity). Using addresses
> and name space of other people without their consent is prohibited.

(and later says it is also OK to use an .invalid)

It is pretty 'junky' when people reply to your msg and don't trim the crap.

--
Mike Easter

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 2023-02-04, Mike Easter wrote:
> Dan Purgert wrote:
>>
>> Big Al wrote:
>>> Why do your PGP sign your message posts?
>>
>> Force of habit; had some trolls faking being me for a bit some years
>> back.
>>
> Example of an alternative strategy:
>
> Your NSP eternal-september allows you to configure an e-s FQDN w/ your
> account, which 'signature' condition can appear in your M-ID and other
> lines in the e-s message header, including the Path making it
> 'impossible' for someone to 'forge' your messages (without being detected).

Or, I just use a PGP signature like I've been doing for years on various
mailing lists and Usenet groups.

> [...]
> It is highly unlikely that anyone reading your msg/s in this group holds
> your public key or uses a tool to confirm your pgp clearsigning.

They can certainly get it.

> It is pretty 'junky' when people reply to your msg and don't trim the crap.

That's on them, not me. You can turn off the display (in slrn it's ']'
by default).

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=2xYt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: DDAB 23FB 19FA 7D85 1CC1 E067 6D65 70E5 4CE7 2860

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 2023-02-04, Dan Purgert wrote:
>
> On 2023-02-04, Mike Easter wrote:
>> Dan Purgert wrote:
>>>
>>> Big Al wrote:
>>>> Why do your PGP sign your message posts?
>>>
>>> Force of habit; had some trolls faking being me for a bit some years
>>> back.
>>>
>> Example of an alternative strategy:
>>
>> Your NSP eternal-september allows you to configure an e-s FQDN w/ your
>> account, which 'signature' condition can appear in your M-ID and other
>> lines in the e-s message header, including the Path making it
>> 'impossible' for someone to 'forge' your messages (without being detected).
>
> Or, I just use a PGP signature like I've been doing for years on various
> mailing lists and Usenet groups.
>
>> [...]
>> It is highly unlikely that anyone reading your msg/s in this group holds
>> your public key or uses a tool to confirm your pgp clearsigning.
>
> They can certainly get it.
>
>> It is pretty 'junky' when people reply to your msg and don't trim the crap.
>
> That's on them, not me. You can turn off the display (in slrn it's ']'
> by default).

Forgot to mention -- turning off the signature's display also prevents
it from being added to the message when following up; at least in slrn.
I would imagine pan/tbird to behave similarly.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=/KwD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: DDAB 23FB 19FA 7D85 1CC1 E067 6D65 70E5 4CE7 2860

On 02/02/2023 14:46, Nic wrote:
> On 2/2/23 9:37 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
> On 2023-02-02, Nic wrote:
>>>> I am using Mint 19.1 Tessa and have updated my kernal to 5.4.0-137.
>>>> Supposedly the kernal is only supported until April 2023. What happens
>>>> after April 2023?
> No, it's not "the kernel" that is going EOL, but rather that the entire
> Linux Mint 19 release set (19, 19.1, 19.2, 19.3) goes EOL in April. It
> means that the version is no longer supported, and that it will no
> longer receive security updates.
>
> Best course of action is to upgrade to LM 20.
>
>
>>
> I do dread that idea. I realize there is a thread active right now about
> the pitfalls/requirements of upgrading. Upgrading versus a clean
> install. I guess if I am going to upgrade I should start making a list
> of the data I want/need to backup/copy to an external drive.
========================

Suggest you do a clean install of LM21.1 (Vera) ,the latest version
,published just over a month ago .

Frank in County Wicklow -Ireland
>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 2023-02-07, wicklowham wrote:
> On 02/02/2023 14:46, Nic wrote:
>> On 2/2/23 9:37 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
>> On 2023-02-02, Nic wrote:
>>>>> I am using Mint 19.1 Tessa and have updated my kernal to 5.4.0-137.
>>>>> Supposedly the kernal is only supported until April 2023. What happens
>>>>> after April 2023?
>> No, it's not "the kernel" that is going EOL, but rather that the entire
>> Linux Mint 19 release set (19, 19.1, 19.2, 19.3) goes EOL in April. It
>> means that the version is no longer supported, and that it will no
>> longer receive security updates.
>>
>> Best course of action is to upgrade to LM 20.
>>
>>
>>>
>> I do dread that idea. I realize there is a thread active right now about
>> the pitfalls/requirements of upgrading. Upgrading versus a clean
>> install. I guess if I am going to upgrade I should start making a list
>> of the data I want/need to backup/copy to an external drive.
>========================
>
> Suggest you do a clean install of LM21.1 (Vera) ,the latest version
> ,published just over a month ago .

21 is nicer all around; though the fact he can in-place upgrade from 19
to 20 makes that path potentially easier.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=80w/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: DDAB 23FB 19FA 7D85 1CC1 E067 6D65 70E5 4CE7 2860