<OT> ubuntu bad press

[Ilmari Vacklin]

Debian Testing and Unstable can be used in a rolling fashion, but Testing is not supported by the security team and Unstable is, well, unstable. It has worked for me in the past, nevertheless.

- Ilmari

--  
Ilmari Vacklin


On perjantai 26. elokuuta 2011 at 15.05, Johnny Rosenberg wrote:

> 2011/8/26 Graham Todd <grahamtodd2 at gmail.com (mailto:grahamtodd2 at gmail.com)>:
> > On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 16:43:35 -0400
> > Ric Moore <wayward4now at gmail.com (mailto:wayward4now at gmail.com)> wrote:
> >  
> > > The fact remains that some people have up and left and told us about
> > > it. Ergo, some have up and left and said nothing. Then that article
> > > came out. It all is worth ~noting~, and it may be cause to reflect if
> > > we're doing the right thing by the average Joe Lunchbucket user, or
> > > the system Admin who wants to install Linux as the default for a
> > > small/large office setting. Are we there still? I see no crime in
> > > expecting packages to be upgraded to the latest STABLE version of an
> > > application, especially when they are as widely popular as Java and
> > > Firefox and possibly Libre Office, ...if that is stable yet. I don't
> > > think that is too much to expect from an LTS version. Again, just my
> > > two cents. Ric
> >  
> > As has been said, the latest versions go to the developers first so
> > that they can test them for stability. I don't know the situation with
> > Ubuntu developers, but in general, developers in the open source
> > environment are volunteers and I would assume that with all the flack
> > flying about at the moment regarding the Ubiquity interface in the
> > latest version, it would have a higher priority than LTS upgrades.
> >  
> > I cannot be sure about this of course, but it seems to me to be logical
> > that when a perfectly able set of applications that are however LTS, do
> > not get automatically upgraded to the latest version or near-latest
> > version (perhaps as a result of the effect it might have on the
> > dependencies of other packages).
> >  
> > Again, as has been noted, perhaps Ubuntu is not the right distribution
> > for your purposes. There are now some very decent Debian Live .iso
> > downloads you can get, test and then burn them to CD or DVD if they
> > are right for YOU, if you don't want to leave the apt tools formula that
> > Ubuntu uses.
>  
> The reason that I suggested Arch in an earlier post was for its
> rolling releases, which seemed to be what the OP indirectly asked for.
> Maybe I misunderstood this completely, though.
> By the way, are there any GNU/Linux-distributions with apt tools AND
> rolling releases? If so, I would like to know.
>  
>  
> Kind regards
>  
> Johnny Rosenberg
> ジョニー・ローゼンバーグ
>  
> --  
> ubuntu-users mailing list
> ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com (mailto:ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com)
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users