Timothy Murphy wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
Consider the possibility that an installation might not work on machine X, but an upgrade might.
Then you've created a totally unique situation where the reason it works at all is likely because you have bits and pieces of some unrelated version still running. That might work for you, but if you have problems no one else will understand them or be able to help.
How can one have "bits and pieces of some unrelated version still running" if you do a clean install?
Erm, he was responding to your comment on having an upgrade work when a clean install won't. His point is well-taken, I think.
I'm not actually asking for your help, I'm simply pointing out that your dogmatic assertion that installation is always better than upgrade is not true, giving as a counter-example the fact that I have a machine where the first did not work, and the second did.
I think that your comment about upgrade being in some instances better than install is well-taken, but not supported by your argument.
IMO Mode on:
A better argument is that if Linux is ever to overtake W* as a user-friendly OS, it had better find a way to upgrade W/O smashing all user data.
Period.
End of argument.
If overtaking W* is not a goal, then whatever floats your boat is fine.
[snip]
Backup is another area which is black magic at present under *NIX systems. Until the time comes when a user, upon boot, is presented with an option to create a disaster recovery set, and is allowed to make checkpoints to CD/DVD/Whatever by just clicking on a widget somewhere, then Linux, in all its incarnations, has a long long way to go just to catch up to W*, let alone overtake it and pass it by.
Just my $0.02 worth. YMMV
IMO Mode off
Mike