Moving from 10.04 to 12.04

Pastor JW rev.olson at
Sun Sep 9 01:32:59 UTC 2012

On 09/08/2012 12:26 PM, Perry Bhandal wrote:
> I prefer a clean install. I keep a copy of /home from my previous
> install, and copy over config files for applications that are too time
> consuming to reconfigure.
> I don't know what the collective wisdom is about allocations, but I've
> never set / to more than 15 gigs. I usually do
> / -> 15 gigs
> swap -> ram*2
> /home -> Remaining space
> Perry
> On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Jim Byrnes <jf_byrnes at
> <mailto:jf_byrnes at>> wrote:
>     Sooner or later I will need to move to 12.04.  Before I make the
>     move I need to decide a couple of things.
>     First should I upgrade or do a clean install.  When I went from
>     Karmac to Lucid I did an upgrade.  It seemed to work well and I have
>     had no problems, but I see a lot of people advocating a clean
>     install.  Looking at my home directory I see it has become a jumbled
>     mess so doing a clean install would give me a chance to restore some
>     order.
>     Thinking about doing the clean install I came up with this idea.  I
>     have a brand new spare HD.  I could put it in my case, unhook the
>     old one and hookup the new one.  Install 12.04, get it running and
>     install what I need.  Then hookup the old HD and copy home and what
>     ever else I find I need to my laptop.  Hookup the new HD and copy
>     over what I need from my laptop.  This way I have an untouched copy
>     of 10.04 to use until I get 12.04 setup and running the way I want
>     it.  Does that make sense?
>     This time I want to try a separate /home partition. I'm trying to
>     decide how much space to give / and how much to /home.  The new HD
>     is a 1TB one, I will probably only format about 300GB. My current HD
>     is 500GB and I formatted about 290GB and have 146GB free.
>     I googled trying trying to find some guidance on how to allocate the
>     available space between / and /home, but found widely varying
>     suggestions.   I decided to look at what I was using on my setup now
>     $ sudo du -shc /   =>  total 105G
>     $ du -shc /home    =>  total 64G
>     So this tells me that if I had a separate / and /home, / would be
>     41G. 41GB seems large compared to sizes I saw when I doing my search
>     and many of those authors said they installed "tons of stuff".  So
>     is the method I used to calculate my current / size valid?
>     If it was valid I am thinking of a / of ~100GB and /home of ~200GB,
>     does that seem OK?

I have noticed that top posters always seem to recommend a "clean 
install" likely a carry over from an old mickysoft mindset.  Resetting 
up my system to work for me, never has impressed me so I looked for a 
distro which works without me having to reset up everything every time I 
"upgrade" my distro.  Actually, doing all that extra work is not really 
an upgrade at all, so I looked for a distro which would upgrade itself 
WITHOUT trashing my settings and without causing me that old windoze 
sense of panic each and every upgrade.  Ubuntu since 2007 has done this 
flawlessly for our use and I'm happy to say every one of our 31 machines 
has upgraded without a hitch everytime.  Our only problem was kwallet so 
we don't use it.

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list