2009/10/31 Robert Collins <[email protected]>: > On Sat, 2009-10-31 at 23:25 +1100, Amos Shapira wrote: >> Speaking of Ubuntu LTS - does anyone see real value in sticking to it? > > So LTS is all about stable [e.g. nothing changed that doesn't have to be > changed]. It has the following: > - regular point releases with kernel updates (giving new hardware > support) > - security fixes
That's generally what I'd expect, based on my experience with Debian and CentOS, and why I tried to stick to it - I usually don't care about having latest versions (as long as the current one does the job) and I don't have too much spare time to mess with upgrades unless I absolutely must. But when a bug was fixed in a later release it was NOT back-ported to the LTS release - so what does "LTS" stand for? "Local Transport Strategy"? (http://www.clacksweb.org.uk/property/developmentplan/glossary/), "Leaning Toothpick Syndrome"? "Low-Temperature Superconductor"? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LTS) > - backports are available if you want newer packages on a per package > basis. "Backporting", in the definitions I'm familiar with (e.g. RHEL), is to fix an OLDER version which is current in a supported release, not an upgrade to a later version of the software. Cheers, --Amos -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
