Re: When stability is pointless
On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 12:58:15PM +0200, Teemu Likonen wrote:
> Johannes Wiedersich (2008-11-05 11:31 +0100) wrote:
>
> > Sam Kuper wrote:
> >> Ubuntu has LTS (Long-Term Support) releases, which roughly translate
> >> to Stable.
> >
> > Yes, but IIRC it is still based on debian sid. Ie. it never
> > transitioned debians unstable - testing - stable queue. IIRC it just
> > means that the developers made a commitment to extend security
> > support. (I hope someone will correct me, if I'm wrong)
>
> That's correct. Ubuntu's LTS (long-term support) releases are "stable"
> in the sense that they don't change and are supported (i.e., security
> and some bug fixes) for longer time than regular releases. In that sense
> they are roughly similar to Debian stable.
>
> But, as you said, Ubuntu's LTS releases are still based on Debian Sid
> and the development and testing process does not differ (in essence)
> from Ubuntu's regular releases. Perhaps they freeze a bit earlier but
> it's still tied to the 6-month cycle and not "release when it's ready"
> thinking. In that sense LTS releases are no more "stable" than any
> Ubuntu release.
Hmm.. that is not entirely correct.
Ubuntu has generally two sections with respect to quality: main and
universe ("multiverse" is the "universe" of "restricted"). Packages in
"main" are maitained by the Ubuntu developers. They should get security
updates for the promised time (e.g: 18 monthes for a standard release,
longer for a LTS version).
Packages in the universe, such as psad, don't get that guarantee. Thus
if you're in Ubuntu and want to keep a fully-supported system, keep
universe out of your apt sources (or at least: avoid normally installing
software from there). Just as you should avoid installing software from
backports.org if you want a fully-supported Debian Stable system (though
maybe non-free would be a better analogy).
--
Tzafrir Cohen | tzafrir@jabber.org | VIM is
http://tzafrir.org.il | | a Mutt's
tzafrir@cohens.org.il | | best
ICQ# 16849754 | | friend
Reply to: