Re: Ubuntu Versions (was: Re: Let's say you never want to upgrade from Lenny...)

[Rob Owens]

On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 07:08:54AM -0400, Tom H wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 6:27 AM, Tom H  wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:56 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
> >  wrote:
> >> In , Tom H wrote:
> >>>On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Rob Owens  wrote:
> 
>  With Ubuntu (I believe) you get "5 years for a server" and "3 years for
>  a desktop" if you go with an LTS release. What packages are server
>  packages and what ones are desktop packages?
> >>>
> >>>Server = X-less so WM-less, DE-less, GUI-less
> >>
> >> Do you have any documentation to support this assertion?
> >
> > Get a Ubuntu server CD and try to install GNOME from it without network 
> > access.
> >
> > Read through the ubuntu-server list archives.
> >
> > How else would they offer different EOL for desktop and server?
> >
> > I'll try to find something for you on ubuntu.com...
> 
> >From https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ServerGUI
> 
> "X11 and desktop packages are not supported for the full 5 year
> lifecycle of the LTS server release"
> 
> >From https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ServerFaq
> 
> "The "Server" CD avoids including what Ubuntu considers desktop
> packages (packages like X, Gnome or KDE)"
> 
> and
> 
> "The Ubuntu Server Edition installation process is slightly different
> from the Desktop Edition. Since by default Ubuntu Server doesn't have
> a GUI, the process is menu driven, very similar to the Alternate CD
> installation process."
> 
The download page, in the "Desktop" section, states "Our long-term
support (LTS) releases are supported for three years on the desktop".
http://www.ubuntu.com/desktop/get-ubuntu/download

I agree that your above references generally agree with server=x-less,
but it seems like the support folks must have a list of packages that
they keep up with in years 4 and 5, and it sure would be nice for them
to share that list with the public.

-Rob


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110407220834.gc13...@aurora.owens.net

Re: Ubuntu Versions (was: Re: Let's say you never want to upgrade from Lenny...)

[Tom H]

On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 6:27 AM, Tom H  wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:56 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
>  wrote:
>> In , Tom H wrote:
>>>On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Rob Owens  wrote:

 With Ubuntu (I believe) you get "5 years for a server" and "3 years for
 a desktop" if you go with an LTS release. What packages are server
 packages and what ones are desktop packages?
>>>
>>>Server = X-less so WM-less, DE-less, GUI-less
>>
>> Do you have any documentation to support this assertion?
>
> Get a Ubuntu server CD and try to install GNOME from it without network 
> access.
>
> Read through the ubuntu-server list archives.
>
> How else would they offer different EOL for desktop and server?
>
> I'll try to find something for you on ubuntu.com...

>From https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ServerGUI

"X11 and desktop packages are not supported for the full 5 year
lifecycle of the LTS server release"

>From https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ServerFaq

"The "Server" CD avoids including what Ubuntu considers desktop
packages (packages like X, Gnome or KDE)"

and

"The Ubuntu Server Edition installation process is slightly different
from the Desktop Edition. Since by default Ubuntu Server doesn't have
a GUI, the process is menu driven, very similar to the Alternate CD
installation process."


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/BANLkTinGv_S08U=au06unmg-70o3hjq...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Ubuntu Versions (was: Re: Let's say you never want to upgrade from Lenny...)

[Tom H]

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:56 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
 wrote:
> In , Tom H wrote:
>>On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Rob Owens  wrote:
>>>
>>> With Ubuntu (I believe) you get "5 years for a server" and "3 years for
>>> a desktop" if you go with an LTS release. What packages are server
>>> packages and what ones are desktop packages?
>>
>>Server = X-less so WM-less, DE-less, GUI-less
>
> Do you have any documentation to support this assertion?

Get a Ubuntu server CD and try to install GNOME from it without network access.

Read through the ubuntu-server list archives.

How else would they offer different EOL for desktop and server?

I'll try to find something for you on ubuntu.com...


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/banlktin5prup_dp5t+brn_snly13ee5...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Ubuntu Versions (was: Re: Let's say you never want to upgrade from Lenny...)

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

In , Tom H wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Rob Owens  wrote:
>> With Ubuntu (I believe) you get "5 years for a server" and "3 years for
>> a desktop" if you go with an LTS release. What packages are server
>> packages and what ones are desktop packages?
>
>Server = X-less so WM-less, DE-less, GUI-less

Do you have any documentation to support this assertion?
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.   ,= ,-_-. =.
b...@iguanasuicide.net   ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Ubuntu Versions (was: Re: Let's say you never want to upgrade from Lenny...)

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

In <20110406231712.gb7...@aurora.owens.net>, Rob Owens wrote:
>With Ubuntu (I believe) you get "5 years for a server" and "3 years for
>a desktop" if you go with an LTS release.  What packages are server
>packages and what ones are desktop packages?

According to documents on Canonical's site, there is no difference in package 
selection.  I quoted directly from such a document earlier in the thread.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.   ,= ,-_-. =.
b...@iguanasuicide.net   ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Ubuntu Versions (was: Re: Let's say you never want to upgrade from Lenny...)

[Tom H]

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Rob Owens  wrote:
>
> With Ubuntu (I believe) you get "5 years for a server" and "3 years for
> a desktop" if you go with an LTS release. What packages are server
> packages and what ones are desktop packages? I don't know. It would be
> nice to see a list somewhere.

Server = X-less so WM-less, DE-less, GUI-less


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/BANLkTi=m6C59fqnTkzdR=cgmzg178qw...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Ubuntu Versions (was: Re: Let's say you never want to upgrade from Lenny...)

[Rob Owens]

On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:37:16PM -0700, Mark wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Freeman  wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:03:41PM -0400, Matt Harrison wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
> > >  wrote:
> > > > On 2011-04-05 12:24:39 Matt Harrison wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>Are we seriously going to argue about which version of Ubuntu is
> > > >>supported for how long?
> > > >
> > > > I think it is reasonable to discuss, if a little OT.
> > > >
> > > >>Who cares?
> > > >
> > > > Someone that doesn't necessarily want to upgrade on Debian's schedule.
> >  With
> > > > Ubuntu, you can get 5 years, as opposed to Debian's ~3 years.  With
> > SLE* you
> > > > can get 10 years.  I'm not sure about RHEL, but I think it is roughly a
> > SLE*
> > > > timeframe.
> > > >
With Ubuntu (I believe) you get "5 years for a server" and "3 years for
a desktop" if you go with an LTS release.  What packages are server
packages and what ones are desktop packages?  I don't know.  It would be
nice to see a list somewhere.

-Rob


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110406231712.gb7...@aurora.owens.net

Re: Ubuntu Versions (was: Re: Let's say you never want to upgrade from Lenny...)

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

In , Tom H wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
> wrote:
>> Someone that doesn't necessarily want to upgrade on Debian's schedule.
>>  With Ubuntu, you can get 5 years, as opposed to Debian's ~3 years.  With
>> SLE* you can get 10 years.  I'm not sure about RHEL, but I think it is
>> roughly a SLE* timeframe.
>
>You can get 10 years with RHEL but 7 is standard.
>
>The first 4 have "full" support.
>
>The 5th hardware support is lessened.
>
>The 6th and 7th there are only updates for important security problems
>and bugs and there are no more SPs.

Ah.  That's almost exactly the SLES 10 schedule.  Thanks for the info!
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.   ,= ,-_-. =.
b...@iguanasuicide.net   ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Ubuntu Versions (was: Re: Let's say you never want to upgrade from Lenny...)

[Freeman]

On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:37:16PM -0700, Mark wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Freeman  wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:03:41PM -0400, Matt Harrison wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > All fine pointshere you go:
> > > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
> > >
> > >
> >
> > As regards Debian users, the pros and cons of another distro vis-a-vis
> > their
> > system is legit.
> >
> > As regards Ubuntu users seeking Debian advice, I think they should
> > establish
> > a debuntu-users list.  But that is irrelevant to this thread.
> >
> 
> Well, there is no interest in me or the people I provide support for, to
> move to Ubuntu, although I can see where this conversation would have merit
> to someone.  I received a few responses answering my original question, so
> thank you for those.  Guess the way to go is with  upgrading.  For all its
> flaws, one nice thing about Windows is that it has a 10-year (14-year for
> XP) support cycle, so while there may be service packs, etc., to the end
> user, the interface is virtually the same for 10 years. I realize that not
> upgrading/getting more goodies/etc. is not the preference of most people on
> the list, but for some Debian users it might be.  It's an "if it ain't
> broke, don't fix it" type thing.
> 

I am feeling your pain. :(

After 1.5 testing cycles, I have tried to follow squeeze into stable.

But now I am remembering that my testing cycle idea was to have a sort of
rolling release.  I would put off upgrades of touchy sounding packages
until I was sure of negotiating a good outcome.  I would store versions
with apt-cacher so I wouldn't have to go looking for packages to back out of
problems.  I wouldn't let myself feel inclined to immediately upgrade
everything that presented.

But I still hit bumps in the road with my old Radeon and some sound issues. 
I still found myself under upgrade pressure from the shear number of packages
migrating to testing. I still had to analyze dependency knots from being
spread all over the release schedule. 

Now I have sid & unstable creeping more and more into my "stable" system
that was only suppose to diversify to the extent of stable-updates,
backports, multimedia and a few choice packages.

If I stay with squeeze to the bitter end, I will have 5 years. But, 2 of
them, I spent more time working on my system than using it.

And, in 3 years I am looking at a big upgrade, potentially with issues I
have become unfamiliar with, and an undetermined learning period, possibly
with a switch away from Gnome.

My lack of decision on this is netting me a stable system with increasing
amounts of sid and unstable, not to mention a little oldstable.

-- 
Regards,
Freeman

"Microsoft is not the answer. Microsoft is the question. NO (or Linux) is the
answer." --Somebody


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110405235112.GA4802@Europa.office

Re: Ubuntu Versions (was: Re: Let's say you never want to upgrade from Lenny...)

[Tom H]

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
 wrote:
>
> Someone that doesn't necessarily want to upgrade on Debian's schedule.  With
> Ubuntu, you can get 5 years, as opposed to Debian's ~3 years.  With SLE* you
> can get 10 years.  I'm not sure about RHEL, but I think it is roughly a SLE*
> timeframe.

You can get 10 years with RHEL but 7 is standard.

The first 4 have "full" support.

The 5th hardware support is lessened.

The 6th and 7th there are only updates for important security problems
and bugs and there are no more SPs.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/BANLkTi™cw8hdkx1ozsm1g8z+y+ay7...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Ubuntu Versions (was: Re: Let's say you never want to upgrade from Lenny...)

[Tom H]

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
 wrote:
>
> 10. Can I install server packages on an Ubuntu Desktop installation
> and vice versa?
>
> Yes – Ubuntu’s flexibility makes it easy. The Ubuntu software repositories
> do not isolate packages to particular types of deployments. All the server
> software in the repositories is available to the desktop user, and all the
> desktop software can also be installed on the server.

The difference between desktop and server is that the server kernel
config is tailored to servers (CONFIG_DEFAULT_IOSCHED for example)
and, since and including 9.10, only has an amd64 version.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/BANLkTi=hc0w4knmphdnoj8jv_ucfkgg...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Ubuntu Versions (was: Re: Let's say you never want to upgrade from Lenny...)

[Mark]

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Freeman  wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:03:41PM -0400, Matt Harrison wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
> >  wrote:
> > > On 2011-04-05 12:24:39 Matt Harrison wrote:
> > >>
> > >>Are we seriously going to argue about which version of Ubuntu is
> > >>supported for how long?
> > >
> > > I think it is reasonable to discuss, if a little OT.
> > >
> > >>Who cares?
> > >
> > > Someone that doesn't necessarily want to upgrade on Debian's schedule.
>  With
> > > Ubuntu, you can get 5 years, as opposed to Debian's ~3 years.  With
> SLE* you
> > > can get 10 years.  I'm not sure about RHEL, but I think it is roughly a
> SLE*
> > > timeframe.
> > >
>
> . . .
>
> >
> > All fine pointshere you go:
> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
> >
> >
>
> As regards Debian users, the pros and cons of another distro vis-a-vis
> their
> system is legit.
>
> As regards Ubuntu users seeking Debian advice, I think they should
> establish
> a debuntu-users list.  But that is irrelevant to this thread.
>

Well, there is no interest in me or the people I provide support for, to
move to Ubuntu, although I can see where this conversation would have merit
to someone.  I received a few responses answering my original question, so
thank you for those.  Guess the way to go is with  upgrading.  For all its
flaws, one nice thing about Windows is that it has a 10-year (14-year for
XP) support cycle, so while there may be service packs, etc., to the end
user, the interface is virtually the same for 10 years. I realize that not
upgrading/getting more goodies/etc. is not the preference of most people on
the list, but for some Debian users it might be.  It's an "if it ain't
broke, don't fix it" type thing.

Mark

Re: Ubuntu Versions (was: Re: Let's say you never want to upgrade from Lenny...)

[Freeman]

On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:03:41PM -0400, Matt Harrison wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
>  wrote:
> > On 2011-04-05 12:24:39 Matt Harrison wrote:
> >>
> >>Are we seriously going to argue about which version of Ubuntu is
> >>supported for how long?
> >
> > I think it is reasonable to discuss, if a little OT.
> >
> >>Who cares?
> >
> > Someone that doesn't necessarily want to upgrade on Debian's schedule.  With
> > Ubuntu, you can get 5 years, as opposed to Debian's ~3 years.  With SLE* you
> > can get 10 years.  I'm not sure about RHEL, but I think it is roughly a SLE*
> > timeframe.
> >

. . .

> 
> All fine pointshere you go:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
> 
> 

As regards Debian users, the pros and cons of another distro vis-a-vis their
system is legit.

As regards Ubuntu users seeking Debian advice, I think they should establish
a debuntu-users list.  But that is irrelevant to this thread.


-- 
Regards,
Freeman

"Microsoft is not the answer. Microsoft is the question. NO (or Linux) is the
answer." --Somebody


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110405201433.GA11627@Europa.office

Re: Ubuntu Versions (was: Re: Let's say you never want to upgrade from Lenny...)

[Matt Harrison]

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
 wrote:
> On 2011-04-05 12:24:39 Matt Harrison wrote:
>>On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
>> wrote:
>>> On 2011-04-05 12:07:16 George Standish wrote:
On 05/04/11 01:04 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> On 2011-04-05 11:51:13 George Standish wrote:
>>> If you need more support than Debian provides and<= 5 years, install
>>> an Ubuntu LTS.
>>
>> Just to clarify, Ubuntu LTS releases are 5 years for the server
>> version, 3 years for the desktop version.
>
> They use the same repositories.  What exactly is the difference?

I'm really not sure.

>>> From
>>> >> P_AW_0.pdf>:
>>> 10. Can I install server packages on an Ubuntu Desktop
>>> installation and vice versa?
>>> Yes – Ubuntu’s flexibility makes it easy. The Ubuntu software repositories
>>> do not isolate packages to particular types of deployments. All the server
>>> software in the repositories is available to the desktop user, and all the
>>> desktop software can also be installed on the server.
>>>
>>> tl;dr: No difference.
>>
>>Are we seriously going to argue about which version of Ubuntu is
>>supported for how long?
>
> I think it is reasonable to discuss, if a little OT.
>
>>Who cares?
>
> Someone that doesn't necessarily want to upgrade on Debian's schedule.  With
> Ubuntu, you can get 5 years, as opposed to Debian's ~3 years.  With SLE* you
> can get 10 years.  I'm not sure about RHEL, but I think it is roughly a SLE*
> timeframe.
>
> There are a number of organizations that would prefer to put hardware out in
> the field with a certain image and only apply security and important bug fixes
> for the life of the hardware.  If the hardware refresh cycle is 3 years, you
> can always install the latest Ubuntu LTS at deployment time and be good for 3
> years; that's not true of Debian (e.g. deployments in fall 2010).  If the
> hardware refresh cycle is 5 years, you can always install the latest SLES + SP
> and be good for 5 years; that's not true of Ubuntu (e.g. deployments that
> don't fall more or less exactly on an LTS release date).
>
> I prefer Debian, but I haven't had to manage 100s or 1000s of installations
> where my main IT staff only has remote access or tried to completely script a
> change from oldstable -> stable.  I'm sure it's possible, but it probably
> requires more work than just updating the systems within the same release.
> I'm also not that interested is chipping on an effort to maintain Debian
> oldstable any longer than it is supported now.  For my purposes, the 1 year
> time frame given to execute an oldstable -> stable transition has always been
> more than enough.
>
> I should also note that Debian's support is (usually) for every package in
> main.  This is a much larger selection of software that is in Ubuntu's
> main+restricted or within the SLE* support matrix.  So, there are definitely
> cases where Debian's support is best-in-class.
> --
> Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.                   ,= ,-_-. =.
> b...@iguanasuicide.net                   ((_/)o o(\_))
> ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy         `-'(. .)`-'
> http://iguanasuicide.net/                    \_/
>

All fine pointshere you go:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/banlktimqhjdejcy3we-okrqbmclxnyr...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Ubuntu Versions (was: Re: Let's say you never want to upgrade from Lenny...)

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

On 2011-04-05 12:24:39 Matt Harrison wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
> wrote:
>> On 2011-04-05 12:07:16 George Standish wrote:
>>>On 05/04/11 01:04 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
 On 2011-04-05 11:51:13 George Standish wrote:
>> If you need more support than Debian provides and<= 5 years, install
>> an Ubuntu LTS.
> 
> Just to clarify, Ubuntu LTS releases are 5 years for the server
> version, 3 years for the desktop version.
 
 They use the same repositories.  What exactly is the difference?
>>>
>>>I'm really not sure.
>>>
>> From
>> > P_AW_0.pdf>:
>> 10. Can I install server packages on an Ubuntu Desktop
>> installation and vice versa?
>> Yes – Ubuntu’s flexibility makes it easy. The Ubuntu software repositories
>> do not isolate packages to particular types of deployments. All the server
>> software in the repositories is available to the desktop user, and all the
>> desktop software can also be installed on the server.
>> 
>> tl;dr: No difference.
>
>Are we seriously going to argue about which version of Ubuntu is
>supported for how long?

I think it is reasonable to discuss, if a little OT.

>Who cares?

Someone that doesn't necessarily want to upgrade on Debian's schedule.  With 
Ubuntu, you can get 5 years, as opposed to Debian's ~3 years.  With SLE* you 
can get 10 years.  I'm not sure about RHEL, but I think it is roughly a SLE* 
timeframe.

There are a number of organizations that would prefer to put hardware out in 
the field with a certain image and only apply security and important bug fixes 
for the life of the hardware.  If the hardware refresh cycle is 3 years, you 
can always install the latest Ubuntu LTS at deployment time and be good for 3 
years; that's not true of Debian (e.g. deployments in fall 2010).  If the 
hardware refresh cycle is 5 years, you can always install the latest SLES + SP 
and be good for 5 years; that's not true of Ubuntu (e.g. deployments that 
don't fall more or less exactly on an LTS release date).

I prefer Debian, but I haven't had to manage 100s or 1000s of installations 
where my main IT staff only has remote access or tried to completely script a 
change from oldstable -> stable.  I'm sure it's possible, but it probably 
requires more work than just updating the systems within the same release.  
I'm also not that interested is chipping on an effort to maintain Debian 
oldstable any longer than it is supported now.  For my purposes, the 1 year 
time frame given to execute an oldstable -> stable transition has always been 
more than enough.

I should also note that Debian's support is (usually) for every package in 
main.  This is a much larger selection of software that is in Ubuntu's 
main+restricted or within the SLE* support matrix.  So, there are definitely 
cases where Debian's support is best-in-class.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.   ,= ,-_-. =.
b...@iguanasuicide.net  ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Ubuntu Versions (was: Re: Let's say you never want to upgrade from Lenny...)

[Matt Harrison]

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
 wrote:
> On 2011-04-05 12:07:16 George Standish wrote:
>>On 05/04/11 01:04 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>>> On 2011-04-05 11:51:13 George Standish wrote:
> If you need more support than Debian provides and<= 5 years, install an
> Ubuntu LTS.

 Just to clarify, Ubuntu LTS releases are 5 years for the server version,
 3 years for the desktop version.
>>>
>>> They use the same repositories.  What exactly is the difference?  Does the
>>> server version not include "restricted"?  (Like neither version includes
>>> "universe" or "multiverse".)
>>
>>I'm really not sure, I've only used the desktop version (besides some
>>very superficial installs of server in a VM).
>
> From
> :
> 10. Can I install server packages on an Ubuntu Desktop installation
> and vice versa?
> Yes – Ubuntu’s flexibility makes it easy. The Ubuntu software repositories
> do not isolate packages to particular types of deployments. All the server
> software in the repositories is available to the desktop user, and all the
> desktop
> software can also be installed on the server.
> This means Ubuntu provides a simple testing platform, where software can
> be trialled, adapted and configured on a systems administrator’s workstation
> easily, before being deployed on the server.
>
> tl;dr: No difference.
>
> Responding to something elsewhere in the thread.  "universe" and "multiverse"
> are not covered under desktop edition or server edition support.  They are
> sort of like "non-free" -- best effort support.  That said, there's a lot of
> good people on the MotU team that keeps "universe" in descent shape for a year
> or so after a release, but I wouldn't count on 5 years.
> --
> Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.                   ,= ,-_-. =.
> b...@iguanasuicide.net                   ((_/)o o(\_))
> ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy         `-'(. .)`-'
> http://iguanasuicide.net/                    \_/
>


Are we seriously going to argue about which version of Ubuntu is
supported for how long?  Who cares?


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/BANLkTi=0t+kgllf4fvrssdirqa1f8h1...@mail.gmail.com

Ubuntu Versions (was: Re: Let's say you never want to upgrade from Lenny...)

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

On 2011-04-05 12:07:16 George Standish wrote:
>On 05/04/11 01:04 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>> On 2011-04-05 11:51:13 George Standish wrote:
 If you need more support than Debian provides and<= 5 years, install an
 Ubuntu LTS.
>>> 
>>> Just to clarify, Ubuntu LTS releases are 5 years for the server version,
>>> 3 years for the desktop version.
>> 
>> They use the same repositories.  What exactly is the difference?  Does the
>> server version not include "restricted"?  (Like neither version includes
>> "universe" or "multiverse".)
>
>I'm really not sure, I've only used the desktop version (besides some
>very superficial installs of server in a VM).

From 
:
10. Can I install server packages on an Ubuntu Desktop installation
and vice versa?
Yes – Ubuntu’s flexibility makes it easy. The Ubuntu software repositories
do not isolate packages to particular types of deployments. All the server
software in the repositories is available to the desktop user, and all the 
desktop
software can also be installed on the server.
This means Ubuntu provides a simple testing platform, where software can
be trialled, adapted and configured on a systems administrator’s workstation
easily, before being deployed on the server.

tl;dr: No difference.

Responding to something elsewhere in the thread.  "universe" and "multiverse" 
are not covered under desktop edition or server edition support.  They are 
sort of like "non-free" -- best effort support.  That said, there's a lot of 
good people on the MotU team that keeps "universe" in descent shape for a year 
or so after a release, but I wouldn't count on 5 years.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.   ,= ,-_-. =.
b...@iguanasuicide.net  ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.