Ubuntu 10.04 LTS released

Ioannis Vranos cppdeveloper at ontelecoms.gr
Fri Apr 30 01:24:42 UTC 2010





On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 00:17 +0100, ms wrote:
> On 29/04/10 20:22, Nikolai K. Bochev wrote:
> > Oh i missed the part where you say that you have rc installed. In that case just apt-get update, no need for dist-upgrade :)
> >
> > Upgrading from previous releases using the update-manager/do-release-upgrade has certain benefits ( from what is visible as output ):
> >
> > 1. It warns you if you have low disk space needed for the upgrade.
> > 2. It aborts if your memory is not enough to handle the upgrade.
> > 3. It searches and removes obsolete packages that are left over from previous releases.
> > 4. It's the "official" way of doing things, so if you go whining that you did apt-get dist-upgrade and something went poo on places like
> > ubuntuforums.org you might get a bit of heat ( not that i think it would be a problem for you after 3-4 years of Gentoo ). For me it's sort of like the sudo argument.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > Wait, that's a guide to upgrade from 9.10. I have 10.04 release
> > candidate.
> >
> > the Update manager indeed gives me several packages to update. Is this
> > the correct route from a RC to a full release too? (probably yes,
> > but...)
> >
> > Also -isn't upgrading from synaptic / apt-get the same, and if not, why
> > (that is: what does the update manager do under the hood?)
> >
> > thanks,
> > m.


I am not sure there is any issue. aptitude and update-manager are both
front-ends for apt. So all these do the same thing.


Ubuntu server edition doesn't install X.Org by default, but provides
terminal access, where apt and aptitude are used.







-- 
Ioannis Vranos

C95 / C++03 Software Developer

http://www.cpp-software.net





More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list