Raspberry PI OS: upgrading and cross-grading

Posted on October 31, 2023 with tags , , . See the previous or next posts.

It's doable, but worth the cost 🤔?

One of the downsides of running Raspberry PI OS is the fact that - not having the resources of pure Debian - upgrades are not recommended, and cross-grades (migrating between armhf and arm64) is not even mentioned. Is this really true? It is, after all a Debian-based system, so it should in theory be doable. Let’s try!

Upgrading

The recently announced release based on Debian Bookworm here says:

We have always said that for a major version upgrade, you should re-image your SD card and start again with a clean image. In the past, we have suggested procedures for updating an existing image to the new version, but always with the caveat that we do not recommend it, and you do this at your own risk.

This time, because the changes to the underlying architecture are so significant, we are not suggesting any procedure for upgrading a Bullseye image to Bookworm; any attempt to do this will almost certainly end up with a non-booting desktop and data loss. The only way to get Bookworm is either to create an SD card using Raspberry Pi Imager, or to download and flash a Bookworm image from here with your tool of choice.

Which means, it’s time to actually try it 😊 … turns out it’s actually trivial, if you use RPIs as headless servers. I had only three issues:

  • if using an initrd, the new initrd-building scripts/hooks are looking for some binaries in /usr/bin, and not in /bin; solution: install manually the usrmerge package, and then re-run dpkg --configure -a;
  • also if using an initrd, the scripts are looking for the kernel config file in /boot/config-$(uname -r), and the raspberry pi kernel package doesn’t provide this; workaround: modprobe configs && zcat /proc/config.gz > /boot/config-$(uname -r);
  • and finally, on normal RPI systems, that don’t use manual configurations of interfaces in /etc/network/interface, migrating from the previous dhcpcd to NetworkManager will break network connectivity, and require you to log in locally and fix things.

I expect most people to hit only the 3rd, and almost no-one to use initrd on raspberry pi. But, overall, aside from these two issues and a couple of cosmetic ones (login.defs being rewritten from scratch and showing a baffling diff, for example), it was easy.

Is it worth doing? Definitely. Had no data loss, and no non-booting system.

Cross-grading (32 bit to 64 bit userland)

This one is actually painful. Internet searches go from “it’s possible, I think” to “it’s definitely not worth trying”. Examples:

Aside from these, there are a gazillion other posts about switching the kernel to 64 bit. And that’s worth doing on its own, but it’s only half the way.

So, armed with two different systems - a RPI4 4GB and a RPI Zero W2 - I tried to do this. And while it can be done, it takes many hours - first system was about 6 hours, second the same, and a third RPI4 probably took ~3 hours only since I knew the problematic issues.

So, what are the steps? Basically:

  • install devscripts, since you will need dget
  • enable new architecture in dpkg: dpkg --add-architecture arm64
  • switch over apt sources to include the 64 bit repos, which are different than the 32 bit ones (Raspberry PI OS did a migration here; normally a single repository has all architectures, of course)
  • downgrade all custom rpi packages/libraries to the standard bookworm/bullseye version, since dpkg won’t usually allow a single library package to have different versions (I think it’s possible to override, but I didn’t bother)
  • install libc for the arm64 arch (this takes some effort, it’s actually a set of 3-4 packages)
  • once the above is done, install whiptail:amd64 and rejoice at running a 64-bit binary!
  • then painfully go through sets of packages and migrate the “set” to arm64:
    • sometimes this work via apt, sometimes you’ll need to use dget and dpkg -i
    • make sure you download both the armhf and arm64 versions before doing dpkg -i, since you’ll need to rollback some installs
  • at one point, you’ll be able to switch over dpkg and apt to arm64, at which point the default architecture flips over; from here, if you’ve done it at the right moment, it becomes very easy; you’ll probably need an apt install --fix-broken, though, at first
  • and then, finish by replacing all packages with arm64 versions
  • and then, dpkg --remove-architecture armhf, reboot, and profit!

But it’s tears and blood to get to that point 🙁

Pain point 1: RPI custom versions of packages

Since the 32bit armhf architecture is a bit weird - having many variations - it turns out that raspberry pi OS has many packages that are very slightly tweaked to disable a compilation flag or work around build/test failures, or whatnot. Since we talk here about 64-bit capable processors, almost none of these are needed, but they do make life harder since the 64 bit version doesn’t have those overrides.

So what is needed would be to say “downgrade all armhf packages to the version in debian upstream repo”, but I couldn’t find the right apt pinning incantation to do that. So what I did was to remove the 32bit repos, then use apt-show-versions to see which packages have versions that are no longer in any repo, then downgrade them.

There’s a further, minor, complication that there were about 3-4 packages with same version but different hash (!), which simply needed apt install --reinstall, I think.

Pain point 2: architecture independent packages

There is one very big issue with dpkg in all this story, and the one that makes things very problematic: while you can have a library package installed multiple times for different architectures, as the files live in different paths, a non-library package can only be installed once (usually). For binary packages (arch:any), that is fine. But architecture-independent packages (arch:all) are problematic since usually they depend on a binary package, but they always depend on the default architecture version!

Hrmm, and I just realise I don’t have logs from this, so I’m only ~80% confident. But basically:

  • vim-solarized (arch:all) depends on vim (arch:any)
  • if you replace vim armhf with vim arm64, this will break vim-solarized, until the default architecture becomes arm64

So you need to keep track of which packages apt will de-install, for later re-installation.

It is possible that Multi-Arch: foreign solves this, per the debian wiki which says:

Note that even though Architecture: all and Multi-Arch: foreign may look like similar concepts, they are not. The former means that the same binary package can be installed on different architectures. Yet, after installation such packages are treated as if they were “native” architecture (by definition the architecture of the dpkg package) packages. Thus Architecture: all packages cannot satisfy dependencies from other architectures without being marked Multi-Arch foreign.

It also has warnings about how to properly use this. But, in general, not many packages have it, so it is a problem.

Pain point 3: remove + install vs overwrite

It seems that depending on how the solver computes a solution, when migrating a package from 32 to 64 bit, it can choose either to:

  • “overwrite in place” the package (akin to dpkg -i)
  • remove + install later

The former is OK, the later is not. Or, actually, it might be that apt never can do this, for example (edited for brevity):

# apt install systemd:arm64 --no-install-recommends
The following packages will be REMOVED:
  systemd
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  systemd:arm64
0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 1 to remove and 35 not upgraded.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n] y
dpkg: systemd: dependency problems, but removing anyway as you requested:
 systemd-sysv depends on systemd.

Removing systemd (247.3-7+deb11u2) ...
systemd is the active init system, please switch to another before removing systemd.
dpkg: error processing package systemd (--remove):
 installed systemd package pre-removal script subprocess returned error exit status 1
dpkg: too many errors, stopping
Errors were encountered while processing:
 systemd
Processing was halted because there were too many errors.

But at the same time, overwrite in place is all good - via dpkg -i from /var/cache/apt/archives.

In this case it manifested via a prerm script, in other cases is manifests via dependencies that are no longer satisfied for packages that can’t be removed, etc. etc. So you will have to resort to dpkg -i a lot.

Pain point 4: lib- packages that are not lib

During the whole process, it is very tempting to just go ahead and install the corresponding arm64 package for all armhf lib… package, in one go, since these can coexist.

Well, this simple plan is complicated by the fact that some packages are named libfoo-bar, but are actual holding (e.g.) the bar binary for the libfoo package. Examples:

  • libmagic-mgc contains /usr/lib/file/magic.mgc, which conflicts between the 32 and 64 bit versions; of course, it’s the exact same file, so this should be an arch:all package, but…
  • libpam-modules-bin and liblockfile-bin actually contain binaries (per the -bin suffix)

It’s possible to work around all this, but it changes a 1 minute:

# apt install $(dpkg -i | grep ^ii | awk '{print $2}'|grep :amrhf|sed -e 's/:armhf/:arm64')

into a 10-20 minutes fight with packages (like most other steps).

Is it worth doing?

Compared to the simple bullseye → bookworm upgrade, I’m not sure about this. The result? Yes, definitely, the system feels - weirdly - much more responsive, logged in over SSH. I guess the arm64 base architecture has some more efficient ops than the “lowest denominator armhf”, so to say (e.g. there was in the 32 bit version some rpi-custom package with string ops), and thus migrating to 64 bit makes more things “faster”, but this is subjective so it might be actually not true.

But from the point of view of the effort? Unless you like to play with dpkg and apt, and understand how these work and break, I’d rather say, migrate to ansible and automate the deployment. It’s doable, sure, and by the third system, I got this nailed down pretty well, but it was a lot of time spent.

The good aspect is that I did 3 migrations:

  • rpi zero w2: bullseye 32 bit to 64 bit, then bullseye to bookworm
  • rpi 4: bullseye to bookworm, then bookworm 32bit to 64 bit
  • same, again, for a more important system

And all three worked well and no data loss. But I’m really glad I have this behind me, I probably wouldn’t do a fourth system, even if forced 😅

And now, waiting for the RPI 5 to be available… See you!