Anyone whants to cry everytime Ubuntu is upgraded???

[lucacerone]

Here we are again...
The Ubuntu monsoon season has come back.. at least for me...
I'm an happy Linux user, use Ubuntu since far 6.10 (actually even before...)
and every time a new Upgrade comes out I find myself being like a kid
that at Christmas morning receives his new fancy toy and is disappointed
that there are no batteries included and he has to wait a few times before being able to play.

I know that I might just have waited a couple of months and probably have
a safe upgrade...
But here I am.. I opened the Pandora Vase and now I find myself
with a laptop that doesn't suspend/hibernate correctly,
doesn't clone the monitor when attaching it to a projector,
the gnome settings have been reset, many softwares have to be reinstalled...

In a couple of days the shop will open, I'll get my batteries and my Ubuntu toys will work again... but not tonight...
tonight I just have a sulky expression on my face and wonder why
I upgraded once more time..... :(

If any of you share my feelings, shred a tear with me....

[smellyman]

I don't know why anybody would upgrade ANY os.

Clean all the way.

[gsmanners]

You know, upgrading is normally a risky process even WITHOUT the fact that Gnome and Ubuntu have gone crazy lately. No way would I even attempt an upgrade right now.

[danbuter]

I don't know why anybody would upgrade ANY os.

Clean all the way.

Problem is if you want newer versions of many programs you have to update the whole OS. This is the biggest weakness of Ubuntu and many other linux distros.

[lucacerone]

You're right upgrading is risky...
but what I can't understand are small things that might have a reason
but seem silly to me like:
unity is built on top of gnome but is not gnome...
so why make it so that configuring unity implies modifying gnome..
couldn't they have different files for the settings?
why certain packages get removed even if they're not unity or gnome dependent... why configuration files are rewritten rather than backed up...
why stuff that was working now it's not...
Honestly, I want new version of softwares especially because the ones that are still in development can have pretty improvements from one version to another are not just gui, or look improvements...
Printers that have always worked now print in b&w rather than in color...

I mean you would expect that upgrading would at most not take advantage of the last feature, not mess up completely your system!!!

[wolfen69]

i don't know why anybody would upgrade any os.

Clean all the way.

+1000

[wolfen69]

Problem is if you want newer versions of many programs you have to update the whole OS. This is the biggest weakness of Ubuntu and many other linux distros.

I don't see it as a weakness. Heck, I used to have to reinstall windows every 2 months anyway, so what's 90min to do a fresh install every 6 months? Keeping most of your stuff on separate drives makes it real easy. I avoid problems by avoiding upgrades. But hey, do whatever floats your boat.

[IWantFroyo]

I'm always really pumped for the releases. I remember when Natty came out, I actually woke up at midnight to get the image as soon as I could. Little did I know that it wasn't released according to my timezone...

I do sometimes feel a little sad when I see something not work, or people bashing Ubuntu, but that generally changes to happiness as I realize all the cool things you can do with the new version.

:popcorn:

[danbuter]

I don't know why anybody would upgrade ANY os.

Clean all the way.

I think you have overfocused on the word upgrade. I took the OP to mean that every 6 months comes a whole new OS. Even if this involves a clean install (which I always do and highly recommend to anyone).

[danbuter]

Heck, I used to have to reinstall windows every 2 months anyway,

Do I even want to ask why?

[Old_Grey_Wolf]

No.

I only install a new version of the OS when I determine that I need it.

[cariboo]

I'd suggest everyone create a small 10GiB partition using either gparted or the Windows disk management tool and actually test a new release on real hardware before deciding to make it your main install.

I know the above may be beyond many users, but with the tools mentioned above, the process is painless, and you get the added benefit of helping make things better, by reporting bugs that may not have come up on other hardware configurations.

[sammiev]

I'm happy moving with the times and think the devs did a great job and will be getting ready to test 12.04 when I go on Vac very shortly. :)

[beew]

Problem is if you want newer versions of many programs you have to update the whole OS. This is the biggest weakness of Ubuntu and many other linux distros.

There are ppas. Many of my softwares in 11.04 and 10.10 are more updated than the packages in 11.10.

[beew]

I'd suggest everyone create a small 10GiB partition using either gparted or the Windows disk management tool and actually test a new release on real hardware before deciding to make it your main install.

I know the above may be beyond many users, but with the tools mentioned above, the process is painless, and you get the added benefit of helping make things better, by reporting bugs that may not have come up on other hardware configurations.

That is exactly what I do except I have the test install in an external drive (so I can test in on a variety of hardware, not just my own computer) But the thing is Ubuntu encourages people to upgrade recklessly as soon as it release a new version, starting with the popup from the update manager.

Now this might not be a big problem if the new releases are ready, but most of the time they are beta quality til at least a month later so some people upgrade as they are expected to and get burned and then swear that Ubuntu is crap. I think Canonical is shooting itself on the foot by releasing a buggy OS every 6 months with a lot of fanfare and encouraging everyone to upgrade unnecessarily/prematurely.

[lucacerone]

Hi, let's be clear, I love Ubuntu and am very grateful for the efforts done in its developing.
I also think that many of you are right. PPAs and having different partition
might be worth to have a "new" system and making fresh install easily.

In my case the problem is that I use softwares like Matlab and Maple (I promise I'll try to switch to Python and other open source solutions..). Or other third parties software.. I'm not sure whether it is safe to save them in a partition /softwares (or whatever) and then reinstall the system.. would they keep working??

Also.. having to reinstall all the softwares used to work it is not as easy as just to make a 90 mins fresh installation.. especially if you've customize many of their settings to your need....

Since the issue came out.. could you advice me a good guide to partitioning,
so that I can keep my documents directory safe?

Or alternatively can you advice me a good advice to handle the system
so that when a new release comes out making a fresh install reduces (possibly void)
the time to be spent reinstalling everything copying data from external hds and so on?

In any case, if I can solve my issues with the projector for the moment I'm more than satisfied with my Ubuntu system.. when I'll be able to hibernate and suspend it again even more :)

[Paqman]

You know, upgrading is normally a risky process even WITHOUT the fact that Gnome and Ubuntu have gone crazy lately. No way would I even attempt an upgrade right now.

I've not had an upgrade go wrong in years, and did two perfect upgrades to Oneiric. So I think the riskiness of upgrading is somewhat overstated. The upgrade process used to be flaky, but in my experience is very reliable these days.

[snowpine]

I also recommend upgrading over fresh reinstall each 6 months.
What I don't recommend however (but see a lot of on the forums) is upgrading without testing first. Don't hit that upgrade button until you've extensively tested the new release to verify that it works on your hardware and that you actually like it!

There is no reason to ever feel like a "kid on Christmas morning" because the fact is you can easily test a Live CD/USB/Virtualbox/spare partition and know exactly what you are getting into.

[Dragonbite]

On my desktop, I keep it LTS releases. On my laptop I have multiple hard drives, 1=Windows, 1=mostly stable and 1=try the new releases.

Since I can freely test the new releases on one hard drive and not have to worry about it being my "production" or primary system, I get a chance to find out if it is any good and if it is worth upgrading (breaking out of the LTS cycle) or not.

I did break the LTS cycle of the desktop before, but that was after finding out the new version (9.10?) could handle my webcam while previously it could not. Otherwise I would not have bothered.

[lucacerone]

Hi Snowpine, the problem is that many times you try the live version
or a fresh install and everything works fine...
But when you upgrade a lot of issues arise because of the packages you previously installed changes in repositories and so on...
The live version of 11.10 just works fine on my laptop... but I can't go live forever :)

[mips]

I NEVER upgrade (unless using a distro like Arch, rolling release), I always do a fresh install be it linux or windows.

[Meadow of Flowers]

Ubuntu 10 worked fine. I've done upgrades to 11 a couple of times and they always prove problematic. They either crash partway or things don't work afterwards because of broken dependencies. As has been already said - its a risky strategy anyway. But installing 11 seems a bit hit and miss as well. Works on some systems, not on others. Overall, I find 11 and its Unity interface rather disappointing but then if you want to draw comparisons with Windows, so was Vista. Ubuntu 10 worked well on just about anything. Perhaps no wonder some have even advised going back to 10 just as some advised going back to XP...

One might also argue that some are reluctant to change. Change is fine so long as it works - and works better. Change is not fine when it breaks things that worked just fine before. Vista was a case in point and I (as did many) went back to XP until Windows 7 came out. This works fine and I haven't looked back since. Maybe Ubuntu 12 will turn things around?

[Grenage]

If one's prepared to do a fresh install, one might as well try an upgrade. Chances are high that it will be fine; if it isn't, you've wasted far less time than a fresh install would have taken. In the long run, it's a net gain by far.

As for Windows, I haven't had to reinstall unless it was a completely new build - and even then it's often recoverable. Vista/7 (hell, even XP) are solid systems - unless you mess about with them.

[beew]

If one's prepared to do a fresh install, one might as well try an upgrade. Chances are high that it will be fine; if it isn't, you've wasted far less time than a fresh install would have taken. In the long run, it's a net gain by far.
.

A flash install takes about 20 minutes (plus the time to install your software, that would take an hour say, usually less ) and an upgrade takes several hours,--during that time a lot of things can go wrong. Even if it appears to be working there may be hidden problems that may come back to bite you later. You also may have problems if you use ppas or install 3rd party software or have a lot of customizations.

[Grenage]

A flash install takes about 20 minutes (plus the time to install your software, that would take an hour say, usually less ) and an upgrade takes several hours,--during that time a lot of things can go wrong. Even if it appears to be working there may be hidden problems that may come back to bite you later. You also may have problems if you use ppas or install 3rd party software or have a lot of customizations.

While I can't say that my upgrades takes anywhere near that long, or I've ever had one go wrong (in the long or short term), I see where you are coming from.

[snowpine]

Disclaimer: I am not an Ubuntu user!

Ubuntu has a "click this button to upgrade" in the Update Manager, which users who keep the default settings should automatically see within a week of the new release.

Furthermore there is no mention of "11.04 users should reinstall to get 11.10--don't try to upgrade!" on the ubuntu.com homepage, the download page, the release notes, or the upgrade notes. Each of these pages claims that an upgrade using Update Manager is 100% recommended and supported.

I guess my question (as a non-Ubuntu user) is: why do so many forum posters blindly instruct new users to "always reinstall, never upgrade!" without learning more details and specifics about why the upgrade might have failed and how to fix it?

If there is a supported, recommended, one-click upgrade path (and it seems clear to me there is) then shouldn't users be encouraged to use it, test it, report bugs, and make it better for the next release? What is the long-term benefit to the Ubuntu project of instructing new users "don't follow the recommended upgrade path!" and why do you even recommend Ubuntu (as opposed to some other distro) if they can't provide a functional Update Manager?

Legitimate curiosity, not trolling (honest!) and not singling out anyone in particular, just a general question, please enlighten me. :)

[beew]

Disclaimer: I am not an Ubuntu user!

Ubuntu has a "click this button to upgrade" in the Update Manager, which users who keep the default settings should automatically see within a week of the new release.

Furthermore there is no mention of "11.04 users should reinstall to get 11.10--don't try to upgrade!" on the ubuntu.com homepage, the download page, the release notes, or the upgrade notes. Each of these pages claims that an upgrade using Update Manager is 100% recommended and supported.

I guess my question (as a non-Ubuntu user) is: why do so many forum posters blindly instruct new users to "always reinstall, never upgrade!" without learning more details and specifics about why the upgrade might have failed and how to fix it?



Not "blindly". I did some experiments before (made a fresh install of a previous version of Ubuntu, with no tweaks, no ppas, install a few software randomly then upgraded to the next version, first time it hanged after a few hours and the system was broken. Tried again and it worked but took more than two hours. The hanging was probably an internet problem, but it is a reality that one has to take into account if you use wireless)

Now Canonical says a lot of things on its website, for example, that a stable release is stable the first day it is released, I don't believe it for a minute (as someone said before it needs mass user base for testing, that happens after release, not before)

Also, upgrade presumes you have a very pristine system. If you have a lot of ppas, third party stuffs and tweaks then chances are it will fail. Now who but the most inexperienced newbie would stick to the repo's outdated offer? Unless you don't do any multimedia stuffs, there are always some apps in the repo that are guaranteed not to work because of bugs don't get fixed or has been intentionally crippled due to some licensing politics ,--so ppa or compile yourself.

Finally the distro upgrade popup. Even if upgrade works 100% and you should do that right after a new version is released, it still doesn't make sense to get people to upgrade on impulse because of a prompt from a popup. Shouldn't you at least do some tests with a live usb and backup your installation? Being prompted out of the blue does not give you that chance. So no, I don't take Canonical's advertisement at face value.

[BrokenKingpin]

I usually do a fresh install of the new release. I did upgrade my desktop from Xubuntu 11.04 to 11.10, which worked quite well actually. I did hit some issues with the new release, mainly around Samba shares, but I worked out those issues fairly quickly. The Xubuntu releases have been getting better and better.

[snowpine]

Hi Beew, thanks for the thoughtful reply!

If you've tested this, and a fresh, vanilla 11.04 install does indeed fail on upgrade to 11.10, then that's (for lack of a better word)... pathetic! and you are right to spare other users the aggravation.

You and I have already had the PPA conversation in the past so let's leave it at that. :)

[koleoptero]

Doesn't anyone else think all this is a bit over-sentimental?

[Paqman]

why do so many forum posters blindly instruct new users to "always reinstall, never upgrade!" without learning more details and specifics about why the upgrade might have failed and how to fix it?

Because it used to be sound advice. Upgrades did used to be highly unreliable. This is the kind of advice that a lot of people just recycle, even if they've not actually tried an upgrade themselves for a long time. Same goes for a lot of the stuff you see trotted out about things like 64-bit and Wubi.

[weasel fierce]

Maybe it's because Im on Kubuntu now, but I have never ever had an issue upgrading. Usually I end up kinda disappointed because everything just sort of worked.

[Meadow of Flowers]

One of my upgrades was done by booting from the CD, the other from the Upgrade button in Update Manager. Both failed, the later having got through the process but then having problems with dependencies. Both times I've had to start again with a clean install. If you're fortunate and the upgrade succeeds then that's great, but in both of these instances (on two different systems) I ended up doing a vanilla install anyway which left me wondering whether to bother with an upgrade in the future.

It ocurred to me that if you have the disk space, then it might be a godfd idea to reseve a partition for the new version of an OS which you can then install along applications at your leisure without affecting the existing working system. If the new version of the OS works for you then that becomes your main working OS and you can then re-use the old partition for the next release...

Of course if you triple boot Windows 7, Windows XP and Ubuntu and then have a separate partition for data like I do then you might run out of available partitions!

[Elfy]

It ocurred to me that if you have the disk space, then it might be a godfd idea to reseve a partition for the new version of an OS which you can then install along applications at your leisure without affecting the existing working system. If the new version of the OS works for you then that becomes your main working OS and you can then re-use the old partition for the next release...Sensible idea - more or less what I do.


Of course if you triple boot Windows 7, Windows XP and Ubuntu and then have a separate partition for data like I do then you might run out of available partitions!Use extended and logical partitions - you can have more than 4 then.

[wolfen69]

Do I even want to ask why? (reinstalling windows every couple months)
Something would always screw up with it. Maybe it was just me having bad luck, but it got real old, real fast. The only time I reinstall linux now, is when I want to, not because it's running bad.

[Meadow of Flowers]

Sensible idea - more or less what I do.

Use extended and logical partitions - you can have more than 4 then.

The curious thing is that the Ubuntu installer does not seem to allow you to create them even in manual mode? I did try this once but I had to use a seperate partition tool (in this case Paragon Disk Manager) in order to create the extended partition and the logical partitions within it and then install Ubuntu. I'm not sure whther the Paragon partition tool can't read what Ubuntu has done twith the logical partitions properly or whether the Ubuntu installer has corrupted something but the free space was approx 300Gb which I partitioned into a 2gb swap space and two partitions of 150Gb and 148Gb approx. When I boot into Ubuntu it shows me 12Gb used out of 150Gb on an Ext3fs partition (I thought I'd chosen Ext4fs), whereas Paragon now shows me just one swap and one data partition with 150Gb used out of 299Gb!

[lucacerone]

Hi, I didn't want to create a flame :)
Canonical advices to upgrade but in my experience I never had a clean one.
Maybe it is because I like things my way and have external repositories,
custom configuration etc etc.
But really things never worked fine for me.
My point wasn't much to complain about Ubuntu,
it was to see if a lot of people have this issue or not.
I don't agree with the fresh install every six months...
The beauty of having a stable system is that fresh install
should be avoided..
Since my system is quite stable now, I'll probably wait for the next
LTS and will install the server edition (supported for 5 years).
I'll add the GUI and so on myself, but at least I should be ok for a fair
amount of time!

[Paqman]

The curious thing is that the Ubuntu installer does not seem to allow you to create them even in manual mode?

Yes it does. In fact IIRC the default setup for any dual boot machine is to create an extended partition.

[Gremlinzzz]

cry over a upgrade? no:popcorn: