Updates from versions in linux have always had issues. Just don't do it.

Ubuntu 14.04 LTS being installed (on another machine).
I just can't wait to install
- CUDA
- 2 embedded programming environments
- a couple of processor simulators
- Java
- ACS smart card reader SDK
- Android stuff
- ...
all over again. :-S

Just because a another special environment needed newer version
of some Eclipse extensions, that couldn't install due to some too old
Linux compnents (sigh).

The same thing seems to be ahead every or every second year...
Every time just, when you needed to start doing something...
A bit frustrating - this is the 4th time in a row...

Hmmm - one of the very few reasons I still keep a Windows 7 environment is for java/Android SDK work. Which in my case is intermittent and personal interest only.
None of my Linux machines is consistently the same long enough so as make it worthwhile pursuing under Linux.

That's what my rant was originally about + updating/upgrading usually leads to new install and all
installed SW is gone.

Comforting to know, however, is that I'm not alone. :-)

I do not want to post anything supportive of Buntu, because I hate that distribution and the person responsible for it. However, the many failed Buntu upgrades are usually the fault of the users, because they have installed third-party software. The more PPAs and whatnot installed, the greater the chances of an upgrade failing. I am not implying that is the situation in this particular case, but it is worth mentioning, because it is something many people are unaware of and wrongly blame the system. (There is no need for that, since there are plenty of other things to criticise Buntu for.)

There is a third option.

Ubuntu disables 3rd party repos to limit this but having said that I rarely used 3rd party repos and only ever had 1 upgrade go well and that was on a system with 3rd party repos all the others were broken to some extent. It's just not worth the effort stuffing around with such upgrades on Ubuntu when the vast majority of the time you need to do a clean install anyway.

I used Ubuntu for almost three years () and never had a single problem with upgrades.

Hi,
12.10 is EOL/unsupported. AFAIK the correct procedure is directly upgrade from 12.04 to 14.04.

Evo2.

I had: upgrade repo (from 12.10 to 13.04) no more available.
Also there was no selection in the update manager to upgrade directly from 12.04 LTS to 14.04 LTS.
It's one of my 5 machines (my development playground) and I don't have the time to lurk for
upgrades, and I don't even want to mess up my setup every 6 months.

The dual boot with Windows Vista, and its updated are already enough a PITA.
Every time you wand to do something with the Windows, the first half of the day goes in
installing updates and rebooting.

Which brings us back to:
Use a distribution that does not have the ridiculous quick release cycle. (And the bugs associated with it.)

Hi,
I think by default Ubuntu LTS upgrades only become available after the first point upgrade. Eg you would need to wait until 14.04.1
What does that mean? You don't have time to be told when an upgrade is available?

Then stick with the LTS and don't upgrade to unsupported versions.

Not sure what this has to do with Ubuntu.

Evo2.

1 members found this post helpful.

This begs the question why are you using unsupported versions?
This depends on how you have "software sources" setup, and I think evo2 is correct.
Yet you have time to stick with unsupported versions of Ubuntu on your development machines.
It seems to me that you need to consider your options. As Randicus says choose a different distribution, and I'll add to one that suits you better.

The 3 oldest Linux distributions that are still supported are Slackware, Debian and Red Hat.
Most other distributions are derived from one of the 3.

Consider them and you'll find that you will have a lot less stress and hassle (IMO) with your operating system.

When I ran Debian I never had any problems and since I have been running Slackware I have had complete success | zero problems:-

I used to have 12.04 until now. I was adviced (by Ubuntu) to upgrade 12.04 -> 12.10 -> 13.04 -> 13.10 -> 14.04. (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UpgradeNotes)
I got to 12.10 just to find that 13.04-stuff was no more available. (It was the upgrade to 13.04 that failed.)

I had to update, because eclipse stuff didn't install (kepler) - some ubuntu-stuff was "too old".

I don't have time to LURK for updates: Sometimes the machine is switched off for months.
I dn't have time to boot it in windows and install the updates and then boot into Ubuntu and install updates, if I have nothing else to do with the machine, but to check if there are updates.
The windows-stuff just takes its own share of the updating time besides Ubuntu.
Also, each time there are bigger changes, I need to reconfigure the boot into Windows boot manager.

I don't install Grub onto the MBR, because in case of Windows booting problems, the fixing SW usually overwrites MBR. Linux tools are more intelligent.

Why I'm using Ubuntu: many experimental stuff has packages/instructions only for Ubuntu.
(It was the question about my 'playground' machine - meant for the experimental stuff.)

It seems they need to update that page. Upgrading to each release is a waste of time and bandwidth. You are supposed to be able to upgrade from one LTS to another. https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Upgrades