On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 19:10:53 +0000 Mark Fletcher <mark2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 06:06:43PM -0700, Charles Curley wrote: > > On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 00:00:54 +0000 > > Mark Fletcher <mark2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > 1. Does anyone have any advice (or a link to offcial advice) > > > regarding whether a new bullseye install is better done with the > > > testing installer at this time, or by first installing buster and > > > then upgrading? > > > > In general, you are better off installing new rather than upgrading. > > Installing new means less Buster cruft on your system compared to > > upgrading buster. Upgrading is a PITA. Why install and then upgrade > > when installing will get you what you want? > > > > Thanks, great to know -- but just for the record that didn't use to > be the advice -- I'm sure a search through the archives of this list > will show times when people advised that the way to install testing > was to install stable and then upgrade. That sounded like a faff, for > exactly the reasons you mentioned, hence why I asked -- was hoping > I'd get the answer you gave! There's a big difference between upgrading a fresh installation of stable, and one that's a couple of years old and has picked up some cruft. There's an even bigger difference between upgrading a fresh, *minimal* installation of stable before adding the desired applications, and upgrading one packed with applications, any of which may have issues when upgraded. I've never had problems upgrading a new, very minimal stable directly to unstable, something I wouldn't want to do with a well-used, mature stable. And I have recently upgraded a working netbook from stretch to buster, which was a sort of trial run to doing it on my server. The test served its purpose, I won't be upgrading the server. > > Anyone have any thoughts on the second question I asked? > No, currently on AMD and Intel. -- Joe
