Announcement

**vinnywright** · Jul 01, 2012, 12:44 PM

I usually wait until the next ver. goes from testing to release then net upgrade (after giving it a month or so for the severs to settle down ).......this box started as 11.04 then upped to 11.10 now it's at 12.04 and when 12.10 goes gold it will be going to it

VINNY

**SteveRiley** · Jul 01, 2012, 01:00 PM

LTS releases won't see major component updates during their lifetimes. For instance, here are the most recent versions of some components in Lucid, all of which are fairly dated by now:

* Linux kernel: 3.0.0
* X Server: 1.7.6
* Mesa: 7.7.1
* Udev: 151
* gcc: 4.4.3

Some popular PPAs drop support for older releases, too. It's becoming increasingly difficult to find current versions of several programs that are compiled for Lucid.

**GreyGeek** · Jul 01, 2012, 01:24 PM

Originally posted by K-Project View Post

.... So now I'm considering just that - going the full term. Has anyone else ever done this, or considering it? ....

When I was developing I kept my DE updated to the latest and greatest. But, now that I use my computer for surfing, email and games, staying on the front edge isn't necessary. I stayed with Lucid from Alpha 1 on Dec 10, 2009 till Jan 3, 2012, when I installed 12.04 Alpha 1. I have decided to stay with Kubuntu 12.04 for the duration. It is working perfectly on my 6 month old Acer 7739, and I firmly believe in the old adage, "If it ain't broke then don't fix it!"

I've been using Linux since May of 1998, and Lucid represented the longest running version of any Linux distro I have ever used. Between Sept, 1998 and Nov of 2003, when Novell bought SuSE, I used 20 releases of SuSE over that five year period. Kubuntu Precise will be the longest running single version of any distro I will ever use, and probably the last as well.

**claydoh** · Jul 01, 2012, 04:37 PM

There are many people who probably will stay with 12.04 for the full 5 years. If it works for them, they probably won't upgrade. Some things will be hard to upgrade. For example, I don''t package the latest KMyMoney for Lucid in my ppa because I would have to backport so many dependencies for it, which would be far too much work, and could possibly break something users may have that needs the stock versions of those libraries.

The real issue is how far can we (Kubuntu) go forward in terms of KDE versions in the LTS before it can't be done.Usually in LTS, we get minor point releases, but I do not know if it has been discussed how far we can go for 5 years, or are allowed to go in terms of what Ubuntu will approve. This is all unexplored territory, really.

-----

Most people seem to upgrade to the latest version or stay one behind the latest, at least from my eyes over the years - not counting those die hards who cling to KDE3 of course

A real issue is that these long term users do not test things such as upgrades, so there is not enough info on what may go wrong until after the release.

Me, I kind of like a semi-rolling release so I usually keep the latest beta installed on the current release via ppa, then either upgrade or fresh install around alpha2. - I often dual boot the current stable and current pre-release. I prefer to upgrade as it is quicker, but I suffered a drive failure so I went ahead and installed alpha 2 clean. Then I clean installed 12.04 alongside because my webcam stopped working - I live dangerously and share a user account between the 2 installs

while I see what broke the webcam driver in the 12.10 kernels.

I am not superstitious, but I keep the this somewhat odd cycle because back in July of 2008, I received a used laptop. At the same time my desktop's hard drive died horribly, and all I had available was an Alpha 2 cd of 8.10 in all its KDE 4.0 goodness. And by gosh I must have been the one guy who didn't have many issues with that oft-reviled KDE release. It worked so well I kept it as my main OS and installed Hardy as my secondary OS for a short time.

**whatthefunk** · Jul 01, 2012, 07:19 PM

Im with vinnywright. When a new version is released, I usually wait a few weeks to see if other people are liking it or having trouble upgrading, then upgrade. I like to have the new stuff, but I need stability.

**jlittle** · Jul 02, 2012, 03:45 AM

I stayed on Lucid until early this year, when I had a burst of trying lots of distros, and settled on Oneric. I intend to go to Precise when 12.04.1 is released.

These days with TB discs, most people can afford to experiment with a few 20 GB partitions for several installs. I still have my Lucid install for a backup. Having a new home directory for each install avoids problems, with links to somewhere (sort of your real home) for your data, but a drawback is having to repeat lots of setting up.

Lucid stayed on Firefox 3.6 which wasn't good, I had to add a PPA for an up to date firefox.

Regards, John

**Qqmike** · Jul 02, 2012, 08:14 PM

Here's a data point to toss into the mix, fwiw. I used to be at the latest & greatest, upon releases. But ... Been on 8.04 since it was released (yes, that's right, April 2008 ). Absolutely no problems; absolutely the most pleasant OS I've ever used (among DOS, XP and a couple dozen Linux distros). BUT, note what GreyGeek says, as it applies here to me as well: "But, now that I use my computer for surfing, email and games, staying on the front edge isn't necessary." Everything about it works (for me), including the KDE apps, Firefox, T-Bird, and Konqueror (as file browser). (I do plan, as I find the time, to finally go 12.04 because, for one thing, I could use Skype; but, as I say, 8.04 seems indestructible for what I've been doing lately.)

**tek_heretik** · Jul 03, 2012, 09:18 AM

As long as I can, until things become so dated and unsupported, I am forced to upgrade, but that will most likely be another LTS version. I used to re-install Win-DOHs at least once a year, just to freshen it up (Lord knows it needed it, lol), but even that got 'old'. Only time will tell my friend.

**K-Project** · Jul 03, 2012, 01:49 PM

Originally posted by GreyGeek View Post

...I firmly believe in the old adage, "If it ain't broke then don't fix it!"

Originally posted by Qqmike View Post

Here's a data point to toss into the mix, fwiw. I used to be at the latest & greatest, upon releases. But ... Been on 8.04 since it was released (yes, that's right, April 2008 ). Absolutely no problems; absolutely the most pleasant OS I've ever used (among DOS, XP and a couple dozen Linux distros). BUT, note what GreyGeek says, as it applies here to me as well: "But, now that I use my computer for surfing, email and games, staying on the front edge isn't necessary." Everything about it works (for me), including the KDE apps, Firefox, T-Bird, and Konqueror (as file browser). (I do plan, as I find the time, to finally go 12.04 because, for one thing, I could use Skype; but, as I say, 8.04 seems indestructible for what I've been doing lately.)

There's definitely a point to be had here. I used to clamour for the latest releases, but nowadays I'm happy as long as it does everything I want, which Kubuntu 12.04 does and then some. It just seems sometimes that there's a monumental amount of effort put into each Linux release by developers, and that it seems a terrible shame to be so quick and keen to be moving away again six months later (or less for some). I think my feeling this way is probably borne out of my recent distro-hopping. It becomes a real drag over time, and you start to lose sight of what it was exactly you were looking for in a OS. You just know that the one you thought was good, wasn't quite what you were looking for. I've learnt now to give it time with an OS, before declaring undying love.

But now I'm here and extremely pleased, it's hard to pinpoint a reason to remove it other than having to chase the next upgrade for reasons I couldn't really explain. I suspect I probably will go to 12.10 in time, but it's becoming less clear cut to me why I would want to, which is amazing testament to Kubuntu 12.04 imho.

Thanks for your replies.

**SteveRiley** · Jul 03, 2012, 01:57 PM

LTSes are important, I wouldn't want to see Canonical move away from that.

But the six-month cycle for other releases does seem like a lot of work. I wonder whether moving to a rolling release model between LTSes would simplify things.

**Teunis** · Jul 03, 2012, 02:48 PM

I kind of follow the same model jlittle describes, I usually have two installs, a stable one and an experimental one.
Parts of the /home partition of the stable version are linked to the /home of the experimental.
But I do upgrade every 6 months, usually around the time the alpha2 or beta of the new release comes out and gets favourable comments around here.
When I'm not/no longer happy with the results of a unpgrade I'll do a fresh install like I did this week on the experimental version of 12.04.

I like to tinker so an LTS is not for me

**tek_heretik** · Jul 03, 2012, 06:41 PM

Originally posted by SteveRiley View Post

LTSes are important, I wouldn't want to see Canonical move away from that.

But the six-month cycle for other releases does seem like a lot of work. I wonder whether moving to a rolling release model between LTSes would simplify things.

Sometimes I wonder if it's just a numbers chasing game on Distrowatch. Before my IP was banned, lol, I used to keep track in my mind who the 'release whores' were.

**GreyGeek** · Jul 03, 2012, 07:31 PM

Originally posted by tek_heretik View Post

Sometimes I wonder if it's just a numbers chasing game on Distrowatch. Before my IP was banned, lol, I used to keep track in my mind who the 'release whores' were.

As Steve Riley pointed out, the only metric from Distrowatch worth anything is their count of operating systems that visit their site.

Distro page hit ranking is totally worthless and easily gamed.

Announcement

Kubuntu LTS: The full five years

Kubuntu LTS: The full five years

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment