Dare I update Ubuntu via Update Manager..?

C_Mababejive

Just upgraded from 10.04LTS to Meerkat..via network.No problems on my dual boot (vista) lappy.

hannoja

I downloaded the 10.04.1 ISO last night, so I'll check that (remember something about check sum or something - just looked it up: MD5 sum/ hash sum) and see if I can successfully burn it (slowly) to disc.

I forgot to mention that I keep all my data on a separate partition too, so hopefully I 'can't' make too much of a mess... I'm terrible at backing up, so it's a good 'kick' to dig out my external and do that! (I don't even do that properly: I just 'drag' all my data over to folders/sub-folders I made with the same names on the external drive! ).

It's a shame I don't retain a lot of the information I learn when doing these things. Each time I do it I have to look everything up again! I built this machine and am extremely pleased with it: I still haven't put a graphics card in it, and it does a fine job for my needs: games, occasional image editing: nothing too graphically-intensive I suppose. I was also pleased with myself to get a dual boot machine working properly with several partitions. Alas, if I had to do it all again, I'd be spending hours looking stuff up, reading, etc.. I'll tackle just about anything when I feel like it though, and it can be good experience, a challenge, and it must increase knowledge, even if I feel like I forget a lot of it..

Sorry for the ramble, and thanks/again for the advice

fwor

My first 4 or 5 Ubuntu upgrades on my main PC were distribution upgrades and, like others here, I found that every time, a few things stopped working properly. So my preferred upgrade would be a clean one.

However, you should be aware that leaving your /home directory unformatted is not universally good - it can also create problems itself. If you take a look at your /home directory, and select "Show hidden files" you will see numerous hidden files and directories (with names that start with the dot character), and that's where most of the problems arise.

The main problems occur when you have an application installed and the new version of Ubuntu has a major new release. Firefox, for example, keeps your personal configuration data for itself in a hidden directory (called .mozilla), and if the config file format changes, then the new version may not like the old config file. In my case, Firefox would not even start, and Thunderbird also gave me a few problems.

A suggested compromise is to back up the whole /home directory, format that partition and then initially only bring back the non-hidden files and directories. This leaves just a few applications where you may need to research a bit more - e.g. Thunderbird, where you need to copy back the .mozilla-thunderbird directory and then configure Thunderbird to point at it in order to get your mailbox back!

esuhl

fwor wrote: »

My first 4 or 5 Ubuntu upgrades on my main PC were distribution upgrades and, like others here, I found that every time, a few things stopped working properly. So my preferred upgrade would be a clean one.

However, you should be aware that leaving your /home directory unformatted is not universally good - it can also create problems itself. If you take a look at your /home directory, and select "Show hidden files" you will see numerous hidden files and directories (with names that start with the dot character), and that's where most of the problems arise.

The main problems occur when you have an application installed and the new version of Ubuntu has a major new release. Firefox, for example, keeps your personal configuration data for itself in a hidden directory (called .mozilla), and if the config file format changes, then the new version may not like the old config file. In my case, Firefox would not even start, and Thunderbird also gave me a few problems.

Why don't more Linux distributions use a rolling release model (like in Arch)? It seems a bit of a waste of time/effort to keep reinstalling an OS to keep it current (but then I don't know much about Linux, so I guess there must be some reason!)

If the configuration file format of Firefox changes, the package manager should migrate the old settings to the new format before installing the latest version. Then everything would work fine. If the old config file can't easily be migrated, then the package manager could just warn the user that their old custom config file has been superseded with a generic/default version in the new format, and they should examine the default settings to see if they are suitable.