[ncolug] Re: upgrade fever

Mike wrote:
> M. Knisely wrote:
>   
>> I didn't say it wouldn't hose my system.  I will say that it will do
>> better than the method that Larry mentioned.
>>
>> Mike K.
>>
>> Mike wrote:
>>     
>>> M. Knisely wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Please, Please, PLEASE; DO NOT upgrade Ubuntu this way.  This is not the
>>>> way to do an upgrade.
>>>>
>>>> Please use:
>>>>
>>>> gksu "update-manager -c"
>>>>         
>>> This is exactly what *Totally* hosed my system.  So much for using the
>>> approved method.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>>       
>
> I wouldn't say it's better.  Using a boot CD from an ancient install,
> along with apt and dpkg is all that recovered my system.  Bear in mind I
> didn't use the old CD to reinstall only recover/repair a totally hosed
> upgrade.
>
> I am now happily running on Feisty not that it's all that.
>
> Someday I need to figure out just how Ubuntu has moved away from init.
> Upstart is the name.  It's supposed to be faster, more flexible, robust.
>  Can't say that it's been any of those on this machine.
>
>   
Wow!  Doing away with init is a big deal!  It should be done as an
"init=" entry at the boot loader.  Anything other than that would force
a unique kernel build which should be avoided and condemned at all costs.

I'm not sure how much faster init should be... It's a pretty
light-weight program.  Also, how much more flexible does an initial
program have to be?  I'm not seeing the advantage.  I think this could
be just one more reason why Ubuntu should be avoided...

> Also without init a "boot Linux init=single" drops you into a busybox
> shell with very few tools, no devices.  I'm sure this is a lack of
> knowledge on my part.  At least with init I could get to single user
> mode and not have to bring up the system from that low of a level.
>
> Guess it's time to google more and see if I can find more updated info.
>
>
>   


Other related posts: