Upgrading from Lucid to Maverick: Fresh, new Install vs Upgrade using Update Manager

[Basil Chupin]

On 07/12/2010 03:00, Tom H wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 5:55 AM, Basil Chupin<blchupin at iinet.net.au>  wrote:
>> On 12/01/2010 03:31 AM, Alan Pope wrote:
>>> On 30 November 2010 07:34, Basil Chupin<blchupin at iinet.net.au>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> The Upgrade Manager 'suggested' to me that it would take 105 minutes to
>>>> download the upgrade files (at which point I went shopping after I
>>>> answered "Go Ahead") and after this downloading finished it "told" me
>>>> that it would take 90 minutes to process the new files, except that at
>>>> the 45 minute mark the whole bloody sheebang stopped because the stoopid
>>>> upgrade system was waiting for me answer "Yes" to the question if I
>>>> accepted the EULA re the ttf mscorefonts -- and there was NO way I could
>>>> respond to this because the EULA menu was BEHIND the Update Manager menu
>>>> and there was no way which I knew (and I tried even waiving a live
>>>> chicken's leg [from one of the chicken's next door] to bring up the
>>>> 'background' EULA menu to be able to answer "YES!"
>>> * Upgrades download more than clean installs (not exactly 'news' given
>>> many upgrades will be upgrading more packages than a base install will
>>> have, so will inevitably have more to download)
>>>
>>> * You unfortunately hit a bug in the upgrade process
>>>
>>> Now, if the purpose of your mail was to rant about the upgrade then
>>> that's done,
>> It is astonishing what people will write when they have some
>> preconceived idea about another person's intentions.
>>
>> There have been numerous questions from people in this forum about
>> whether to upgrade or to go for a clean install. Responses varied.
>>
>> I just went thru the exercise of doing something which I never did do
>> before and so thought that it would be useful for those who will be
>> asking the same questions about upgrade vs clean install, to be
>> proactive and provide some info about my experience.
> It was a PITA post that had no reason to be on this list except that
> you felt like blogging.
>
> If only you had kept it as short as Alan's summary above.
I unintentionally do yourself an unintended injustice by responding to 
your post on the basis that you simply did not comprehend what I wrote 
in response to Alan - an affect for which I did not plan or wish for.

If you reread, carefully, what I wrote, as a response to Alan, you will, 
hopefully, eventually perhaps, understand what I wrote.

BC

-- 
Attorney:    Are you qualified to give a urine sample?
Witness:    Are you qualified to ask that question?