On Fri, 28 May 2010 21:15:54 -0400 (EDT), Stan Hoeppner wrote: > Stephen Powell put forth on 5/28/2010 8:18 AM: >> >> I've had so many problems with migrations that I don't do them >> anymore. > > My experience thus far is the exact opposite Stephen. I have one server that > I've in-place upgraded from Woody through Lenny, including hardware upgrades > along the way (NIC, HD, IDE to SATA, piix to libata, same mobo though). > That's 4 successive live distribution upgrades of a single host spanning 8 > years. I'm sure servers can be easier due to usually having far fewer > packages installed. (knocks on wood) > > Now, the distro upgrade to Squeeze once it becomes Stable may be a different > experience for me entirely, especially if it destroys LILO, installs Grub2, > and hoses my system in the process.
I'm glad that you've had better luck than I have, Stan. But now that you mention it, "servers" (i.e. machines with no desktop environment) seem to tolerate ad-hoc migrations much better than desktop machines. If I were going to migrate a desktop machine to a new release, I wouldn't dare attempt it without following the procedure in the release notes closely. But a "server" tends to be more tolerant and more forgiving. But by comparing the list of packages installed on a machine that has been migrated with the list of packages on a machine that has been installed from scratch, I typically notice dozens of left-over packages from the old release that the fresh install does not have. I like to keep things as lean as possible and still retain full functionality. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/470819586.143722.1275101300576.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
