Bad assumption. :-) I have CD and DVD ISO images for everything of
interest to me and it takes only a few minutes to burn a CD or DVD
as required.

> My point was generally it is best to do a clean installation.
> Because Linux is modular you can save your home directory or even
> better have it reside on a separate partition and therefore anything
> you do to the root partition can't hurt you. Upgrades from disk are
> a piece of cake if you have your system set up properly.

No disagreement with the above. But then you still need to reinstall
from the repos all the apps that were installed in the just-prior
release.

> I should know. I have 11 Linux partitions for distros plus a home
> and swap partition. I install distros and de-install them daily.
> To date I have never had to re-do my home directory. I have kept
> the same one for years and never lost a piece of data or a setting.
> I would be hard pressed to set up my Thunderbird accounts from
> scratch simply because I never need to. I say this and previous
> comments so that people can realize how easy Linux is to install
> and replace if need be.

Again no disagreement. I assume you have case statements in your
.bashrc or .profile to set different PATH, MANPATH, etc. for each
different distro. There are significant differences between the
multitudinous Linux distros (at least for those of us who use the
command line and develop/test software).

> I almost never upgrade. It just isn't worth the hassle to me. I
> keep the most recent releases of my favorite distros on disk or save
> them as ISOs to use with Unetbootin. If it strikes my fancy I will
> delete my whole Ubuntu or any other distro and replace it, just for
> fun. Call me warped, but it is so easy to install.

We agree on easy installation, but I have some 30-40 computers here,
most with just one OS on them (and some that triple-boot), and I have
to do both work and personal things with them and I don't have the
luxury of blowing-away an OS "just for fun". :-)

> There is no need to fear, so why take any chances with placing good
> on top of perhaps bad when you don't have to. A clean installation
> gives you a fresh start. There is no risk. With an upgrade you take
> what you get because like it or not it is a patch work.

Yet Ubuntu does it correctly. As I've written here several times, I
was *very* impressed with how the 7.10 -> 8.04 went earlier this year.
The entire upgrade was automatic and consumed none of my time -- it
happened while fixing/eating dinner and watching a movie which I
would have done regardless of the upgrade occurring or not.

> Saying that your upgrade went okay so upgrades in general are okay
> is like saying that you have never got cancer from smoking so
> smoking is okay.

I did not write "upgrades in general are OK"; I specifically cited
Ubuntu as having done it correctly. You want to see a nightmare? Look
what's going to be required upgrading Fedora 9 -> Fedora 10. *THAT* is
a case where a new install makes sense (assuming one wants Fedora 10).

I have to keep ISOs and OSs around for most everything. One client's
infrastructure is mostly Fedora 3 (they run 24/7), so I have some
systems into which I can quickly swap-in a disk with that release --
I cannot afford to blow-away old stuff "just in case", and disks are
inexpensive (just bought some new Seagate Barracuda 500GB drives for
$56 each).

The pending upgrade I'm expecting for Solaris 10u5 -> Solaris 10u6 in
a few weeks is expected to be as troublefree as Ubuntu's 7.10 -> 8.04

I admire your efforts "playing" with different distros, and the help
you've provided so many people is, I'm sure, greatly appreciated! I
wish I had the time to do the same, but at my age time is precious.