3 ms·
Yeah, if it didn't get wrecked every other upgrade, I'd probably still be on Ubuntu. But talking to the Ubuntu Washington people this past weekend, its still an
by StudentStuff 9y ago
Yeah, if it didn't get wrecked every other upgrade, I'd probably still be on Ubuntu. But talking to the Ubuntu Washington people this past weekend, its still an ongoing problem. Comparatively, here I am running Stretch when I started with Wheezy years ago!
- isostatic 9y agoOn the server the only upgrade issues I've had are things like apache configs breaking when moving from 2.2 to 2.4, or php (from 5 to 7), which happened when upgrading 14.04->16.04. Not sure how redhat/centos/etc would have prevented that. Likewise a few of our custom system management packages need tweaking when new versions come out, but aside from that no problems with 1200+ servers.
- __s 9y agoPrevents PHP upgrade issues by not forcing that alongside the distro upgrade. Have php5 & php7 packages
- isostatic 9y agoTrue, but it needed to happen (and I think apache 2.4 was forced). Generally it takes us about 12-18 months to get round to moving things on, and an OS upgrade is a great opportunity to kick us into a 'do it now' state.
- Karunamon 9y agoI've had relatively smooth upgrades on 14.04+. Anything 12 and before has always been a bit tricky. 14 -> 16 I'd rather just reinstall since it leaves all the old upstart stuff laying around and can be confusing to troubleshoot.
- StudentStuff 9y agoUhh, I'm talking about desktop Ubuntu, not server installs where you don't have pulse, xorg, a DE and a shedload of other software. Getting a server upgrade right shouldn't be too hard, but when you add on another thousand packages or so, it makes the upgrade process much more likely to have breakage.
- ryandrake 9y agoYea, on my desktop and laptops, I've completely switched over from Ubuntu to plain vanilla Debian and have been extremely pleased.