Kubuntu breezy->apt-get dist-upgrade->dapper[worked4meBut...]

[Matthew Kuiken]

Tez wrote:
> Joe(theWordy)Philbrook wrote:
>   
>> Should I even consider doing an apt-get install update-manager for
>> when I upgrade 6 months from now???? I heard in ubuntu-users that
>> update-manager works better than apt-get... ! ??????????????
>>
>> I also heard that update-manager needs to have the gui up and
>> running DURING the upgrade process?
>>
>> And I kind of liked the plan where all I had to do was replace each
>> string of "breezy" with "dapper" in the sources list and then just:
>> apt-get update
>> apt-get dist-upgrade
>> {copy a few files from /boot to my real boot partition}
>> {edit my real grub.conf}
>> reboot & play with dapper...
>>
>> Especially since I could do this from a virtual console.
>> # In my case I did the above between a clean reboot of my
>> # breezy system and the first time I'd have run startx...
>> # (I never really trusted leaving the gui up during major upgrades)
>>
>> Now like I said in the Subject: line, this worked for me, (this time).
>> Apart from having to reinstall a few things like open office & mozilla
>> and redo some kde preferences, it went really well. In fact about the
>> only really annoying thing was having to look back in my pine
>> saved-message folder for the clue that told me how to use:
>> update-rc.d -f kdm remove
>> to dump the annoying gui-login prompt, and let me start at runlevel 3.
>>
>> Having been used to burning a new installation cd to upgrade
>> fedora & etc... I found the apt-get method almost painless.
>>
>> But since this is the first time I did it this way, I don't know if
>> that's the way it usually works, or if I simply got lucky this time.
>>
>> So is there any real reason to try update-manager next time?
>> Would it be likely to work better on my kubuntu system than apt-get?
>> Does it even have a text mode user interface yet???
>>     
> As you probably know update-manager (as all package management GUIs) is
> just a front-end to apt anyway.
> Update Manager just checks in for a new version of (K)ubuntu, then asks
> if you want to upgrade, that's the only difference.
> Update manager then changes your source list for you, dose a apt-get
> update then an apt-get dist-upgrade, it's just automated is all.
>
> When I upgraded to Dapper, I just went in to a VT, stopped some services
> (to free up some mem so it would run quicker) and used nano to change my
> source.lst, ran script to log output, then the usual apt-get .....(then
> went and made a sandwich, watched some tv... :-p)
>
>
>   

The upgrade manager is essentially a front-end to apt, but it has a few 
built-in features that make the upgrade easier without needing manual 
intervention. IIRC, it has some increased logic for handling some 
package dependency issues caused by the upgrade process. The page for 
Dapper Upgrades:

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DapperUpgrades

details all the ways you can upgrade. You will notice that there is a 
lot more to do, and more warnings on the apt-get command line path. For 
people who are familiar with the system, and can manually deal with 
dependency issues, I don't believe that the apt-get method is any worse 
or better than the update manager.

-Matt