Share with the community your Lucid Lynx install/upgrade experience

[iflanery]

I wanted to upgrade last night, but Karmic wouldn't let me for some reason, probably owing to the presence of KDE3 on my system and some broken repositories... or something.

So..... I decided to do a clean install. This went alright for the most part, but I'm pretty sure I made a mistake during the installation as I didn't set a mount point for my /home partition (the data is still *there*, fortunately), and as a result, it now shows up under /media/, followed by one long alpha-numeric string... anyone know how to fix that?

Other than that, the problems I've encountered are the typical problems I've always faced after a clean install: getting all the plugins installed, etc., etc.

My system is a Dell Inspiron 530N, 250GB HDD, 1GB of RAM, nVidia GeForce 8300 GS, with a 1.3 Ghz Intel 4 processor.

[sanderd17]

The install worked almost flawlessly. The only problem was that ubuntu didn't recognize my mint theme and gave me a windoze-95-like theme instead. I've used mint for one release and used the same home directory.

When I chose my own theme, it was solved.

[irv]

I wanted to upgrade last night, but Karmic wouldn't let me for some reason, probably owing to the presence of KDE3 on my system and some broken repositories... or something.

So..... I decided to do a clean install. This went alright for the most part, but I'm pretty sure I made a mistake during the installation as I didn't set a mount point for my /home partition (the data is still *there*, fortunately), and as a result, it now shows up under /media/, followed by one long alpha-numeric string... anyone know how to fix that?

Other than that, the problems I've encountered are the typical problems I've always faced after a clean install: getting all the plugins installed, etc., etc.

My system is a Dell Inspiron 530N, 250GB HDD, 1GB of RAM, nVidia GeForce 8300 GS, with a 1.3 Ghz Intel 4 processor.

I am sure if you start a new thread about you home mount point someone will be able to help you. I have a thought on how to fix it, but I am not sure I am 100% right, so I will keep it to my self and not screw up you system any more.

[Robot007]

Did an upgrade on one laptop (32 bit 9.10 to 10.04) and it worked flawlessly. However, on my other laptop I did a clean install to dual boot with windows 7 and after a few restarts was no longer able to boot into either. I fixed that by formatting the partition and putting 9.10 on that partition. But someone recently told me that the original 10.04 iso (which I used) had a bug that made it do that, but now it's fixed. Can anyone confirm/deny that?

[kfh]

I attempted both an upgrade and fresh installation of lucid lynx desktop on a compaq cq60 laptop having an external keyboard and monitor after the most recent karmic "update" overwrote my network settings and re-activated the blasted network-manager.

DHCP networking worked after the upgrade, and, although I wanted to run with a static IP address, I got sidetracked by a monitor-resolution restriction of 800x640 when the displays were mirrored. If I set the monitors for having different content, the resolution was adjustable over the full range of resolutions, but the gnome control bar on the top of the display was only available on the laptop's display. Googling this issue resulted in suggestions to edit the Xorg.conf.

Editing a config file to set display resolutions for dual monitors just doesn't qualify as a feature of a "Just works" OS.

The fresh install of lynx didn't work any better, and, rather then spend another several hours fixing monitor-resolution and static networking, I decided to go back to rhel5. The rhel5 install took about 1.5 hours with networking and display resolution working. I was even able to get openoffice installed.

I'm really sorry that the ubuntu desktop developers decided to make desktop administration so tedious for desktop users. And updates should NEVER overwrite network settings.

*** Disclaimer for those willing to analyse this poll ***
- Most of users voting here are users with issues,
users with painless experience are not likely to come here. So the statistics here do not represent the reality.
- If you want to compare Lucid Lynx release with other ubuntu releases based on this poll then here are the previous polls (the only good reference to start an analysis) :
Karmic Koala - Click Me
Jaunty Poll - Click Me
Intrepid Poll - Click Me
Hardy Poll - Click Me
Gusty Poll - Click Me

You will find here a Summary proposed and maintained by NCLI - Click Me


The purpose of this thread is to share your experience installing/upgrading Lucid Lynx.

Did it work flawlessly ?
Did you get problems ?
Did you manage to solve them ?
if yes how ?
...
...
.

Feel free to post your experience here and think to explain how you solved the problems you got, it might help other users in your case.

Thank you for contributing

[markMDW]

Install of 10.04 was very difficult on my Intel Core i5 machine, apparently because of the default video driver causing the machine to become severly unstable. Anyhow, I managed a workaround and have the Ubuntu recommended restricted propritary video driver installed and everything is just perfect, now.

Thanks to everyone how posted with helpful hints. Those tips all combined helped with the fix! read all about my experience here:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1488088

[chuck4200]

Beware of upgrade process if you have Multiple HDD and partitions.

Hosed my dual boot XP system on an upgrade through 9.x to 10.x. I would strongly advise installing from a Live CD. I have/had two HDD's with multiple partitions on each. The install of upgraded files appeared to be fine, although I could not test it. Would not reboot.

Probably occurred with GRUB2 asking what HDD/partitions to installi on the right partition or drive. Quite a few problem posts regarding this installation feature/problem.

Lost the Boot.ini, could not fix using the lilio -M routine, or the XP Recovery Console fixboot/fixmbr suggestions. Testdisk did not work for me with Live CD - only testdisk_static will install/run and gives you only a log file, no option screens.

If you have a standalone Linux box, or a dedicated drive it might work better as many have reported.

[iflanery]

I am sure if you start a new thread about you home mount point someone will be able to help you. I have a thought on how to fix it, but I am not sure I am 100% right, so I will keep it to my self and not screw up you system any more.

Got it. New thread is here.

Any advice you have would be appreciated, though.

[mollyj]

Since I do not usually upgrade every time there's a new version I have been using the last LTS package (8.04) for a couple of years. Along comes 10.04 and this is also a LTS and so I decided to try an update. I dutifully backed up my user files and then tried to install Lucid (10.04) from a live CD. The live CD ran and, because I have an Elonex webbook(and this has a perenial problem with the screen driver) I was using an external monitor. I clicked on install and waited; I answered the questions and since I thougt that I had nothing to lose I installed to a clean harddrive. After churning away for sometime the whole system appeared to have finished ( I didn't stay around to watch for the hour or so that it took). I turned off the machine, remobved the usb CDROM and turned everything on again...... result...... nothing; no boot no disc activity just a par of blank screens. Undaunted I reconnected the CDROM and tried the live CD again. This time it asked me for a username and password but refused to accept the one that I had used on the install and so it wouldn't get any further. I tried lots of different things... passwords.... switching off and on.... unplugging varios bits. No - joy.
Finally I fished out an old magazine disc that had 9.10 on and managed to install this however this reported that 10.04 was already there. Out of curiosity I accessed the 10.04 partition but found that it only contained a single folder. I decided to cut my losses.... I'd spent the best part of a day installing etc. I reinstalled 9.10 using the whole drive as as far as I could tell the half drive allocated to 10.04 was useless to me and I then managed, with the help of Alan Bell of the Webbook Blog to get the screen on my Elonex working. I would like to upgrade to the LTS version but I'm wary ... Once bitten twice shy as it were. Any advice would be welcome.... Was it just a bad live disc (the machine didn't complain) or is there a fundamentaly problem with the quirky hardware of the Elonex and 10.04?

[r m h]

Not impressed - the most problematic release of Ubuntu to come out of Canonical in 4 years. My length of experience with Ubuntu is only 4 years old.

Fresh install on a 32-bit P4 3.6GHz machine with new EIDE disk fails miserably.

ubuntu-10.04-desktop-i386.iso burned to CD.

ISO md5sums match published values in MD5SUMS from http://ubuntu.osuosl.org/releases/lucid/

CD creation (under Ubuntu) tells me it succeeds.

Booting from the install CD fails with the following informative results:

A Window entitled "installation failed" which contains the text "The installer encountered an unrecoverable error. A desktop session will now be run so that you may investigate the problem or try installing again." appears with an "OK" button.

When I click the OK button, I see a very brief display of text on the blank black screen, one piece of that text appears to be "getpwuid failed due to unknown userid (0)"

Then when the desktop appears, nautilus keeps crashing.

My fresh install experience is total garbage.


I have already upgraded (apt-get dist-update) 4 laptops, 4 servers, and 4 workstations to Ubuntu 10.04. One server and one laptop scrambled their boot process and didn't build the right grub files (menu.lst and grub.conf didn't reconcile). The goofy thing here is that the machines that scrambled their boot process were virtually identical (h/w and s/w) to other ones that went fine.

All of these machines are single boot, and only booted a completely up-to-date Karmic Koala (9.10) release prior to the upgrade.

A 77% installation/upgrade rate (to a bootable 10.04) is not impressive at all. The 10 machines that did successfully boot had assorted other issues that I have resolved, so I will call them successes.

This is the absolute worst release of Ubuntu in the past 4 years that I have had experience with. I do not expect this poor quality from Canonical based on past experience.

So, the question is, have you lost your process? or, what happened?

I left Red Hat Linux/Fedora after 11+ years for a similar reason.