0

I currently run Ubuntu Mate 16.04.6 on both my Thinkpad T430 and my homebuilt desktop machine (hardware continuously upgraded for fifteen years or so), and I'm interested in upgrading to Ubuntu Mate 18.04.2. I started the upgrader on the laptop, and was informed that tens of packages would be removed -- I presume because the upgrader only upgrades built-in packages and the packages in question were versions that weren't compatible with 18.04. The upgrader also disabled the repositories for "third party" packages, presumably for the same reason.

My question is, with a system that's not 100% "box stock" (which probably applies to nearly any install that's not used in a locked-down, IT-administered environment), will the "upgrade to 18.04.2" process be reliable enough to plan on simply updating the repo information for my other required packages (update-sun-java, BOINC, etc.) and reinstalling those, or can I look forward to "it'll take less time to install everything clean"?

In my experience, installing clean and reinstalling third party apps would have me looking forward to spending an entire weekend of free time on each machine, so if the upgrade is dependable, it would be preferred -- but spending two weekends, one upgrading and cleaning up after a broken upgrade, and the next installing the new version clean, with a week unable to use the machine in between, is obviously undesirable.

Improve this question
5
  • If you want a perfect release-upgrade; remove all unofficial sources & packages installed from those (ie. return it to stock packages & packages from official repos only) then release-upgrade; then add-back what you need for 3rd party resources (for your new release). QA-testing of release-upgrades is done only using official packages (no 3rd party).
    – guiverc
    Jul 14, 2019 at 14:39
  • Whilst there isn't a single standard for versioning software, Canonical/Ubuntu tend to police it pretty well for official sources (main by Canonical, universe by motu's etc), but 3rd parties are free from those rules, which isn't a problem until you release-upgrade... There more 3rd party sources you add, the greater the potential problems...
    – guiverc
    Jul 14, 2019 at 14:49
  • @guiverc "QA-testing of release-upgrades is done only using official packages (no 3rd party)." So, in other words, if you actually use Ubuntu in the real world, for real life uses, you can't depend on upgrades. Good to know. Wish I'd known five years ago when I settled on Ubuntu, in part because it had release upgrades.
    – Zeiss Ikon
    Jul 15, 2019 at 10:51
  • The combinations of 3rd party packages are huge. If you look at the number of packages in 'main' (main with support guaranteed by Canonical), 'universe' (community supported with limited by Canonical), 'multiverse', 3rd party proprietary supported by Ubuntu & 3rd party thru a Ubuntu repo, and 'multiverse' (restricted licence packages mostly) - that's a huge amount of QA-testing that is provided. It's well documented if you look (help.ubuntu.com/community/Repositories/Ubuntu) and why most corporate/enterprise users limit themselves to specific sources.
    – guiverc
    Jul 15, 2019 at 11:31
  • @guiverc "It's well documented if you look" -- sure, because all new users read and memorize every word of available documentation, That's why no one adopts Ubuntu -- by the time you've read all the documentation for 14.04, 18.04 is out.
    – Zeiss Ikon
    Jul 15, 2019 at 12:03

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
0

I use this script to clone Ubuntu 16.04 to a new partition:

The script updates grub menu with the new clone version and my original 16.04 version is still there safe and sound.

It takes over an hour to run the do-release-upgrade on the clone so I run it while making dinner or something like that. I check back periodically to see if there is a question to install new configuration file or keep old one.

I keep notes on if I updated configuration file for package A or kept the old one. I do this in the likely event I rerun the cloning script and do-release-upgrade. I do not backup before do-release-upgrade because it is a clone that can simply be recloned. This saves a lot of time.

I will play on the upgraded clone for many hours exploring new features, testing old applications and installing new ones. If some applications broke during the do-release-upgrade I may reboot into the original version and remove them, tweak them or replace them with another application that does the same thing but is more compatible with 18.04.

Over the last year I have repeated the cloning process and performed do-release-upgrade four or five times. I haven't pulled the plug and abandoned 16.04 though. I hope when 20.04 comes out next spring they provide a do-release-upgrade that goes direct from 16.04 to 20.04 so people can skip the 18.04 middle step.

In short it is a good idea to run do-release-upgrade on a clone and repeat the process as many times as necessary. Once done on your live data there is no going back.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .