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
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
