Stable is a term mostly associated with Debian. They run three levels of packaging: stable, testing and unstable. Everything starts out unstable and through time it moves towards testing and eventually is marked stable. All of that takes time which is why Debian stable is 2 - 3 years behind Ubuntu for the same application.
Ubuntu uses Debian unstable as its starting point. Other distributions based on Debian will run from Debian testing or Debian stable. It ll depends on who the distribution is geared towards. Debian stable is made to be rock solid. Ubuntu is not necessarily less stable than Debian. It runs its own testing and it has two levels of development, regular and LTS. When I refer to stability in Ubuntu I am mostly looking at the goals and the risks being taken by the developers.
When an LTS release is coming up Ubuntu makes fewer changes and takes less risk. A regular six month release, excluding the LTSes, is more inclined to take greater risks. LTS release goals are less ambitious and are less likely to cause problems. If they were planning a big change such as when they switched to Unity on an LTS cycle then they would try to phase in the change and to make accommodations for users. LTS is considered more stable because they want to make the user experience for enterprise better with fewer surprises. The same software channels are used for servers as for desktop.
Ubuntu also uses different package groups such as Main (official), Universe (community), Restricted (not open source), and Mulitverse (not free license, likely has an EULA to agree to). This just compounds the confusion, because users get it all from the same package manager. Most if has to do with internal controls and the developers interests. To be a Master of the Universe or MOTU (real title) one must be approved by Ubuntu and you must meet their terms and goals.
Roy
On Tuesday, April 22, 2014 8:54:57 AM, "highskywhy@yahoo.de" <highskywhy@yahoo.de> wrote:
good afternoon
special question:
what does the word stable mean?
One for the stable crowd and one for the adventurous crowd.
What does adventure mean?
regards
sophie
Am 10.04.2014 14:30, schrieb Linux Canuck:
> A new version of Ubuntu comes out on April 17th. It will be LTS or long
> term support. If you install it and do not upgrade it, then support will
> last for five years. If you install it and upgrade it in six months then
> you will have to do so every six months. Ubuntu has two upgrade paths.
> One for the stable crowd and one for the adventurous crowd. There is an
> important change to note. Support for six month releases used to be for
> 18 months. That is no longer the case. It is only for 9 months now which
> means you no longer have the option to NOT upgrade in six months because
> you will have to re-install after 9 months if you let the support run out.
>
> Linux Mint will come out about a month later and will be based on
> Ubuntu, as always. There are two differences. One is that Mint does not
> feature Unity as a desktop choice. Instead it has two of its own, Mate
> (Mah-tay) and Cinnamon. The second difference is that Mint cannot be
> upgraded the same way that Ubuntu can. It has no upgrade tool. You have
> to manually change the repository sources by editing a file as root and
> then you will have to type some commands to do the same thing. Ubuntu
> does this from the GUI and it has a better chance of success, depending
> on how carefully you edit and type. There is good news in this, though.
> Linux Mint will also be LTS, so you won't have to upgrade for five
> years, unless you want to do it every six months.
>
> There are advantages to both upgrade cycles. Five years gives you
> stability and you do not have to worry about things not working for five
> years. Six month cycles give you the latest and greatest versions of the
> applications and kernel with drivers.
>
> I have followed an aggressive upgrade path since 2000, both in RPM
> distributions and Debian ones. I have NEVER had a computer "brick". Nor
> have I heard of that happening to anyone else. What can happen is that
> you may have a system crash and become unstable and have to backup and
> re-install. That is no big deal once you have done it a few times. I
> live on the edge, computer-wise, and therefore I have done just about
> everything else to my system.
>
> About 10 years ago, I got smart. I started my own home partition with
> Linux being spread across three partitions, / (root), /home and swap.
> Since that time, I have never had to backup. Instead I just re-install
> and reformat the root partition. I re-use the home and swap partitions.
> The trick is to do a manual or custom installation and then check and
> double check that you have chosen NOT to format /home, but to format the
> root partition. I use the same user name and my settings and data stay
> intact.
>
> Re-installation never scares me. Many experienced users actually prefer
> to do this than to upgrade. It gives you a fresh start. It is not a lot
> of work either once you learn a few tricks. You can back up your sources
> and your package list and post-installation open the package list and
> the package manager will re-install everything that was on it before.
> You can even use your computer while all this is being done. The only
> down time is the actual installation which takes half an hour or so.
> Longer if you choose to update before you re-boot. I do not. I do a
> basic installation then update after it re-boots. That way my computer
> is down for a shorter period of time.
>
> There is a lot to digest here. Think about it and what your goals are,
> then make a plan to implement things slowly. Make sure you get a handle
> on one thing before you change it up too much and cannot figure what the
> problem is. Most problems have an easy solution and the worst,
> re-installation, is not so scary as it may sound.
>
> Roy
> On Thursday, April 10, 2014 12:46:41 AM, Gene C. Falck <gfalck@merr.com>
> wrote:
> Hi, Roy,
>
> You wrote:
>
> > If you are on the six month cycle you MUST upgrade every six months or
> > you run into trouble. Support used to be for 18 months but that has
> > been shortened to 9 months. If your support runs out then you must do
> > a re-installation and cannot get any upgrades and security patches.
>
> Hmm. I ran into a mention of a distro bricking a
> computer when it went out of support; that sounds
> like big trouble. I gather Mint, which is what I'm
> trying to set up, is about to have newer version
> come out. I suppose, then that when the new one
> comes out I'll have about three months to upgrade. (?)
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Gene Falck
> gfalck@merr.com
>
__._,_.___
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (65) |
To unsubscribe from this list, please email LINUX_Newbies-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com & you will be removed.
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment