1. Newbie evaluation. 2. Gutsy>Hardy: request for advice.

[Nils Kassube]

Bas Roufs wrote:
> What is becoming clear to me is that the best option for the upgrade
> from Gutsy to Hardy is a 'clean install' (install 'from scratch') after
> taking some other measures:
> * making a good back-up of all my data
> * critically revising the software packages to be maintained and to be
> removed
> * making a 'kubuntu-files' script of all the software packages to be
> reinstalled after the fresh installation of Hardy.

In the past I preferred clean install because I had lots of troubles when 
upgrading Suse installations many years ago. After switching to Kubuntu I 
tried a version upgrade and there was no trouble for me. Therefore I now 
prefer upgrade instead of clean install.

As you will backup your data anyway to prepare a clean install, I would 
suggest you also try an upgrade first and check if you have trouble. If 
you have trouble, a clean install is still possible, but probably it 
isn't necessary.

> So far, so good. However, two important questions still remain:
> * what is the best moment to try to resolve the sound problem on my
> desktop: before or after the upgrade indicated above?

After the update. Maybe the problem doesn't exist with Hardy.

> * what about the problem with Firefox 3, which is in Hardy, but which
> is still unable to work with vitally important add-ons?

You can uninstall firefox3 after the upgrade and install firefox-2 
instead.

> Finally, I have a few questions about your message, Xurxo:
> > I have been upgrading since feisty (dapper to feisty upgrade broke my
> > swap partition due to using UID to identify partitions).
>
> How can prevent happening something like this? When having that
> problem, did you 'install from scratch' (clean install) or did you use
> an upgrade option via e.g. adept?

You shouldn't have that problem because Gutsy is using UUIDs already. 
Furthermore, now the update-manager handles the UUID problem if you 
upgrade from Dapper to Hardy.

> >  I don't think Hardy was stable enough for a LTS release ....
>
> 'LTS Release': to be honest, the information about this issue is
> confusing. So far I understood that Ubuntu Hardy is meant as 'Long Term
> Support' however Kubuntu Hardy not. Can someone explain a bit more on
> this issue?

LTS means 3 years support for desktop systems. Due to the switch to KDE4 
the KDE developers will not support KDE3 for another 3 years. Therefore 
Canonical decided not to make Kubuntu 8.04 an LTS version.

> > I don't think Hardy was stable enough ......so I'd wait at least a
> > few weeks.....
>
> This sounds realistic anyway.

Well, I would like to hear WHY somebody thinks Hardy isn't stable enough. 
Just stating the thought doesn't make it realistic. It may be true for 
some people, but I have upgraded about 10 machines now to Hardy without a 
problem.


Nils