Should novice users still be told to "clean install, not upgrade"

[earthpigg]

Well, we all know the old conventional wisdom was to stick with fresh installs due to the high incidence of in-place upgrades (10%? 25%? depends who you ask.) causing problems.

i haven't tried an in-place upgrade in years. What is the current wisdom on the subject?

my mom is still on 9.04, and a friend is on 9.10. if i can tell them it's safe to follow the in-place upgrade paths with a reasonable degree of certainty, then they will be at a whole new level of self-reliance with Ubuntu.

edit: i shouldn't have put the word 'novice' in the thread title, as it serves no purpose. either upgrade paths are safe, or are not safe. if there is a high probability of breaking, then a fresh install (with backed up ~) is almost certain to be a more efficient use of time.

[Austin25]

I don't know, but I was hoping on not doing a fresh install.

[hyperdude111]

Since 8.04 been doing clean install. Upgrades are becoming safer but it's always nice to have a new clean system to play with.

[blur xc]

I did about three successful upgrades and got cocky- and went ahead and tried doing one on a dell min 10 w/ the infamous gma500 gpu, and had it fail most horribly. Then two clean installs later, a lot of hacking to get the suspend/hibernate working, and we are good to go.

So- in my experience, if you have normal well supported hardware, an upgrade will probably be ok, if you've got something weird or goofy that requires custom configuring to make work, a clean install is probably safer- or just stay with what works and save yourself the headache.

(note: I didn't vote in the poll - none of the options seemed to apply to my thoughts on the subject)

BM

[Paqman]

i haven't tried an in-place upgrade in years. What is the current wisdom on the subject?


They used to be flaky, but they've become much more reliable these days. The system now handles repositories better. IMO with relatively standard system (ie: little software from outside the Ubuntu repos) then there's no reason to think you will have any trouble doing an upgrade. I've done numerous upgrades on various different machines over the last few versions and all have worked flawlessly.

[FuturePilot]

I've been doing upgrades since forever and I've never had a problem caused specifically by the upgrade itself. Upgrades are actually the recommended path to take and are tested more than clean installs.

[KdotJ]

I think that novices should do a clean install. Not only as it means there is a much much lesser chance that something will break, or get messed up in some way, but also because it forces them to practise setting things up and learn how to configure things.

Just my 2 pence

[23meg]

Well, we all know the old conventional wisdom was to stick with fresh installs due to the high incidence of in-place upgrades (10%? 25%? depends who you ask.) causing problems.

i haven't tried an in-place upgrade in years. What is the current wisdom on the subject?

Regardless of what it seems to indicate, always take "the current wisdom" on popular topics such as this with a pinch of salt, as it tends to lack any technical basis, and be rooted in anecdotal evidence and hearsay.

The officially recommended method for going from one Ubuntu release to the next has always been a release upgrade, and still is. A huge amount of effort goes into both automated and manual testing of the upgrade paths, and there's no compelling technical evidence with which you could make the case that a release upgrade is less safe than a fresh install.

However, an operating system upgrade is inherently a sophisticated act, and it's more than just bits moving inside a machine; there are human factors involved. Some points to remember before attempting one from an old post I dug up:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=8863743&postcount=13

[MasterNetra]

other - It depends upon your hardware, if the hardware in your system is commonly used and well supported, then by all means upgrade, though you probably want to wait a couple of weeks to a month after a release for bug ironing.

If you have older and/or somewhat obsecure hardware then you might want to test the version your wanting to upgrade to via Live-CD and if all seems ok backup everything you want to save and try the upgrade but be prepared to do a clean install if it goes bad.

Of course if you modified the system (e.g. compiled the lastest whatever package that the system would use, or some other version of it.) then you may want to consider a clean install.

But meh, I'm no expert and I just clean install anyway to erase all doubt.

[Frogs Hair]

Clean install !

[XubuRoxMySox]

Actually, I always tell newbies to stay one release behind the newest one just because the bugs are usually pretty much worked out by then. Teach them to set up a separate /home or /data partition to preserve all their personal stuff (but backup anyway!), and try a fresh install or upgrade only when the next new version is released (staying "one behind"). Or stick to the LTS stuff, especially on an older 'puter.

I only upgraded once, and had no issues, but I was always taught that fresh install was not only safer, but better because it keeps things clean without having to run Computer Janitor after an upgrade and hope it does its job without taking something with it that your system needs.

I dunno if that has changed since I started (with 8.10 just before 9.04 was released) or not, but I haven't read much to indicate a change in the "traditional wisdom" of my first mentors.

-Robin

[vayu]

I'm a serial upgrader. I used a Dapper system for several years that had been upgraded from Hoary to Breezy to Dapper. Then I did a clean install with Intrepid and upgraded it to Jaunty to Karmic to Lucid. This setup is the smoothest and slickest OS I've ever had. Ironically I just made a new partition and installed Lucid fresh and I can't get it as fast and error free as the upgraded one.

[Old_Grey_Wolf]

I have had some successful upgrades. I hve had some that were not. So I couldn't choose an option that said it was always safe.

No mater what method I choose, I follow the advice in my own signature below. :p

[smellyman]

Novice or advanced clean all the way.

It is just way too easy to do. Cleans out the messes

[Khakilang]

At first I upgrade from 9.10 to 10.04. No problem there except for some small issue with Facebook game. Than I do a fresh install and see the different. Not much actually everything works the same. But the Facebook game problem was gone. The reason I do an upgrade is because I have all the software and drivers I want downloaded and I am lazy to do it all over again. But fresh install seem a bit faster and less problem.

[earthpigg]

I was always taught that fresh install was not only safer, but better because it keeps things clean without having to run Computer Janitor after an upgrade and hope it does its job without taking something with it that your system needs.

I was always "taught" to fresh install, too. We need to question the conventional wisdom from time to time, lest we succumb to group-think.

:D

[jrusso2]

The way I look at it an upgrade saves time and if I have an issue I can fall back to clean install if need be.

[adeypoop]

If I was you I'd make sure all your important things are backed up, then download the iso and make a cd. Then when you try an upgrade knowing that if it all goes wrong you can do a fresh install anyway.

I don't think there is a right or wrong choice between upgrade or fresh install. Personally, I always like to do a fresh install though. My documents are all stored on a 'data' partition, so a fresh install is not a big problem for me. I like to see how the new OS looks 'out of the box' , I also like knowing that all the left over files and clutter that have accumulated are now gone. Plus I like having the CD kicking around to use as a recovery CD just in case. I usually keep an old copy of my home folder renamed to something else for a little while just in case.

[Eldera]

I voted other. I think a novice should be told the pros and cons of upgrade vs. clean install and make up their own mind which they are most comfortable doing.

The pros and cons seem to be well covered in this thread.

The only thing that I can add is that if the novice is the kind of person that experiments by adding software or partitions and then deciding that they want something different, a clean install has the advantage of setting them up with a "clean slate".

[qamelian]

I always go with the inplace upgrade unless a new feature requires an install. Except for a bad upgrade experience on a couple of systems that had the old utility Automatix on them upgrades have never caused me a problem. In fact, doing an upgrade was the only way I could get my laptop from Feisty to Intrepid, as neither the desktop CD nor the alternate CD for intrepid would even boot on said laptop.

I also needed to upgrade in order to run Lucid, as a fresh install leaves me with a system that locks up solid within seconds of logging in. Upgrading from KK gives me the option of keeping the kernel I was running previously so I can at least troubleshoot a bit from a working system.

[Spice Weasel]

My Ubuntu install has only once successfully upgraded, other times it's just half-upgraded or completely failed. With my other distros, I've never had this happen... I'd say get a separate /home/ partition or just don't upgrade. Backing up and doing a clean install or keeping all of your documents on a separate partition is much easier.

[koenn]

ended method for going from one Ubuntu release to the next has always been a release upgrade, and still is.

That's the official line, and my preferred way of doing things.
However, I'm under the impression Ubuntu does not always handle upgrades well.
I only do LTS - from 6.06 to 8.04 the recommended method (update manager) failed, but I got through it with the unrecommended "update sources.list and run apt-get distupgrade" and some dpkg troubleshooting.
I reinstalled it a few weeks later, because I wanted to avoid future upgrade trouble or other random trouble caused by the troublesome upgrade.

Until two weeks ago, I was still waiting for update manager to inform me there's a new LTS available. I got a new PC since then, so a did a fresh install, but I'm still wondering why upgrade-manager insisted that there was no new release available. Isn't 10.04 an LTS ?

So, I'm not convinced handles LTS to LTS upgrades very well. Given the short release cycles for non-LTS, and the sometimes huge differences between versions (upstart, filesystems, grub, ...), I assume matters can be worse for those.

[LowSky]

I would kill for a rolling release of Ubuntu. But then novices would kill Ubuntu every time something was upgraded that borked the system

[julio_cortez]

Judging from the experience I had, well.. I'd go for a clean install all the way.
And it is something I feel I can suggest, because it reduces the incidence of trouble to the minimum.

Your mileage may (and I hope it will) vary from mine of course :)

[del_diablo]

I would kill for a rolling release of Ubuntu. But then novices would kill Ubuntu every time something was upgraded that borked the system

Get Sidux then?

[FuturePilot]

That's the official line, and my preferred way of doing things.
However, I'm under the impression Ubuntu does not always handle upgrades well.
I only do LTS - from 6.06 to 8.04 the recommended method (update manager) failed, but I got through it with the unrecommended "update sources.list and run apt-get distupgrade" and some dpkg troubleshooting.
I reinstalled it a few weeks later, because I wanted to avoid future upgrade trouble or other random trouble caused by the troublesome upgrade.

Until two weeks ago, I was still waiting for update manager to inform me there's a new LTS available. I got a new PC since then, so a did a fresh install, but I'm still wondering why upgrade-manager insisted that there was no new release available. Isn't 10.04 an LTS ?

So, I'm not convinced handles LTS to LTS upgrades very well. Given the short release cycles for non-LTS, and the sometimes huge differences between versions (upstart, filesystems, grub, ...), I assume matters can be worse for those.

LTS releases have /etc/update-manager/release-upgrades set to "lts".

[Zoot7]

Get Sidux then?

Worth mentioning:
http://sidux.com/index.php?module=News&func=display&sid=607

I'm not sure if there's been any updates since then mind you.

On topic, when I used to use Ubuntu the one and only time I tried an upgrade was from Hardy to Intrepid, and the result was a borked system, so I went for clean installs after that.

[Denis Krajnc]

Well personally I always do clean install and I advise doing that to everyone.

[andymorton]

I upgraded my laptop from 9.10 to 10.04 and I've no problems with it at all. It's solid as a rock. Perhaps I just got lucky. I'll probably do a fresh install when 10.10 is released just be on the safe side.

andy

[koenn]

LTS releases have /etc/update-manager/release-upgrades set to "lts".
yes, so ?
it doesn't seem to work ...

[snowpine]

The upgrade feature exists and is officially supported (www.ubuntu.com/desktop/get-ubuntu/upgrade), therefore it is always my recommendation.

If this important feature is buggy and broken (my experience is that it is not), then that is sad. :(

[xpod]

If someone without a separate home partition is going to back everything up and go through with the fresh install then there`s really nothing to be lost by at least having a go at the upgrade first and seeing how it goes. As long as anything important to them is backed up what harm can it do? It might end up frustrating them a little but hey...that`s all part of the learning process and indeed part of the fun. How long does it take to throw the disk/usb in and re-install after all?

One of the drives in my Desktop has been upgraded since the day i bought the machine nearly three years ago now. I`m sure i`ve had minor issues along the way but nothing that sticks in the mind. The other drive was usually re-installed with the development version a month or two before final release time but i`m a wee bit behind the times with that drive of late. Just not had the time.

[FuturePilot]

.

[drawkcab]

Back up and prepare as if you're going to perform a clean install and then upgrade and see what happens. I was pretty happy with my upgrade from 9.10 to 10.04. It saved me a lot of time.