On Feb 4, 2008 12:41 PM, Scott Kitterman <ubuntu@kitterman.com> wrote:

On Monday 04 February 2008 11:43, Mathias Gug wrote:

> I'd mention that although dist-upgrade is available, it shouldn't be
> used. We've seen some request on #ubuntu-server about fixing a

> dist-upgrade failure. The basic answer is to use do-release-upgrade
> instead of dist-upgrade.

JFTR, I did Dapper -> Edgy -> Feisty -> Gutsy over the weekend on a Kubuntu
box using dist-upgrade. *Dapper --> Edgy took some manual installing of

packages to get through and Edgy --> Feisty and Feisty --> Gutsy just worked.

I'd suggest that while dist-upgrade isn't the official way, it generally works
and to the extent it doesn't it's because of packaging problems we ought to

investigate and try to fix.

do-release-upgrade automates updating sources.list and works through a bunch
of special cases AFAICT. *I'd suggest that making dist-upgrade work is a good
goal for improving the quality of our packaging. *We probably won't get

there, but to the extent we get closer it makes do-release-upgrade's job
easier and lower risk.

Scott K

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com

https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam

I agree, but I think most people that we care about will be doing Dapper -> Hardy.* That complicates dist-upgrade a lot.


--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam

On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 12:41:17PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Monday 04 February 2008 11:43, Mathias Gug wrote:
>
> I'd suggest that while dist-upgrade isn't the official way, it generally works
> and to the extent it doesn't it's because of packaging problems we ought to
> investigate and try to fix.
>
> do-release-upgrade automates updating sources.list and works through a bunch
> of special cases AFAICT. I'd suggest that making dist-upgrade work is a good
> goal for improving the quality of our packaging. We probably won't get
> there, but to the extent we get closer it makes do-release-upgrade's job
> easier and lower risk.
>

Agreed. Bugs filed because dist-upgrade fails are not marked as Invalid
(because not supported). They should be considered valid bugs.

However the recommended way to upgrade from one release to another is
via do-release-upgrade (which is the method that has been the most
tested).

--
Mathias Gug
Ubuntu Developer http://www.ubuntu.com

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam

On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 12:43:20PM -0500, Adam Sommer wrote:
> + <para>
> + There are several ways to upgrade from one Ubuntu release to another. This section gives an overview of the supported upgrade method.

I would use the word recommended instead of supported.

The rest looks good to me.

--
Mathias Gug
Ubuntu Developer http://www.ubuntu.com

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam

On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 12:41:17PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> On Monday 04 February 2008 11:43, Mathias Gug wrote:
>
> > I'd mention that although dist-upgrade is available, it shouldn't be
> > used. We've seen some request on #ubuntu-server about fixing a
> > dist-upgrade failure. The basic answer is to use do-release-upgrade
> > instead of dist-upgrade.
>
> JFTR, I did Dapper -> Edgy -> Feisty -> Gutsy over the weekend on a Kubuntu
> box using dist-upgrade. Dapper --> Edgy took some manual installing of
> packages to get through and Edgy --> Feisty and Feisty --> Gutsy just worked.
>
> I'd suggest that while dist-upgrade isn't the official way, it generally works
> and to the extent it doesn't it's because of packaging problems we ought to
> investigate and try to fix.

Although, in most cases, they're fairly easy to sort out/remedy, ime.

(from the sed and apt school of upgraders)

--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam

I would use the word recommended instead of supported.


I made the change to recommended and committed the new section to the repo.* It can always be updated later if need be.*

At least before String Freeze :-)

Thanks again Mathias.

--
Party On,
Adam
--
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam