[kwlug-disc] What's the best desktop distribution?
unsolicited at swiz.ca
Mon Feb 8 14:44:19 EST 2010
Khalid Baheyeldin wrote, On 02/07/2010 10:46 PM:
> On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 10:08 PM, unsolicited <unsolicited at swiz.ca
> Khalid Baheyeldin wrote, On 02/07/2010 7:37 PM:
> I can see your point is some (?) years as Drupal
> settles down.
> You've pointed out that Drupal is currently still in rapid
> evolution. In your experience / expectation, is LTS,
> Ubuntu LTS is indeed viable. I never had something break
> on me
> on a server because of an apt upgrade. Shouldn't say "never",
> but at least I don't recall such
> an incident.
> You took me the opposite way. What I meant was, if you're in the
> middle of frequent updates anyways, does non-'LTS' really add any
> significant effort? Do you gain / lose much?
> Sorry, now I take the question to mean: "If non-LTS forces
> frequent upgrades, then what is the value in using them at all?"
> Hope I got it right this time?
> Close. If you're there already for Drupal updates, in your
> experience, is the gain of non-LTS currency against the expense of
> more frequent updates it brings, over LTS, balance the scales in any
> way? Because you're already there for Drupal updates anyways. (This
> is getting hard to say.)
> With Drupal, it is only one application, and I know where to get updates
> (drupal.org <http://drupal.org>)
> and how to get alerted on new updates (update.module in Drupal 6). That
> works well for minor version updates (6.x to 6.x).
> The Drupal cycle is now around 2 years, if not more. So major version
> upgrades are the less painful when we had a 6-8 month cycle.
> With Drupal, I can replicate the site to a test machine in 10 to 15
> minutes, and upgrade it there. I can't upgrade my laptop from a non-LTS
> version every 6 months and find out that wireless did not work, or the
> screen resolution is bad, and then back it out. I can't do work without
> my desktop.
> This is why the rule is to be on LTS, and make exceptions where the need
> arises (e.g. KDE unstable, Drupal on servers, ...etc.)
> Did I get it this time?
Gotcha. In essence, the non-repository updates are well quantified /
identified / bounded. The LTS updates have, traditionally, not broken
critical functionality for you, such as wi-fi, or KDE. Non-LTS updates
have, such as 8.x to 9.04. [Mind you, we should all have paid more
attention to the little voice in the back of our heads telling us to
be wary of a major upgrade of KDE.]
> First, a bit of background: One thing that Ubuntu does which is
> disconcerting is that after a while the repositories of non-LTS
> versions will be made unavailable, meaning
> that you cannot install anything some time after the release
> becomes unsupported.
> The reason I use non-LTS releases on the desktop is Ubuntu's
> decision with 8.04. That release was meant to be an LTS release,
> supported for 5 years for servers and 3 years for desktops. That
> was true for servers and the Gnome Ubuntu. For KDE, the release
> of KDE 4 caused the Canonical team to decide that 8.04 will NOT
> be an LTS release for Kubuntu. I decided to skip 8.04 on the
> desktop. When I got a new laptop I installed 9.04 on it since it
> was the latest available. That was a very buggy release, and had
> lots of problems. Now with 9.10 out, things are back to being
> both stable AND functional. But it is not LTS and hence I have
> to keep upgrading until an LTS comes out.
> I remember your commenting on 9.04, which matched my own experience,
> and others. How likely are you to not stay with a more current
> release on the desktop, anyways? Heck, there are still warts in 9.10
> that I don't expect to be fixed until the next release. And not long
> after we'll be into this cycle again.
> If I were forced to stay with 9.04 (e.g. 9.10 hypothetically never was
> in the making), then I would have done something drastic. I was already
> considering Xubuntu (no Gnome, no KDE) because 9.04's KDE 4.x was so bad.
I'm guessing going back to 8.x wasn't an option, it being a new laptop
for you at the time. And we're back to hardware / security support of
old version on new hardware.
> From a day to day thing, they are the same. I feel at home enough on client
> machines that are Debian. Did not do full version to version upgrades though
> to say one way or the other.
> Now, if it is RedHat/CentOS with Plesk, I start cursing in Arabic ...
Thanks for this. Good to know.
Including, yes, even at just a command line, that the differences
between Debian/Ubuntu and CentOS/Fedora are significant enough to be
irritating and annoying, if you're not 'native language' comfortable
with both. Even for a former Mandriva user.
More information about the kwlug-disc