Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

The Burning Bridges of Ubuntu

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the cry-havoc-and-let-slip-the-forks-of-war dept.

Ubuntu 346

jammag writes "According to this article, 'Whether Ubuntu is declining is still debatable. However, in the last couple of months, one thing is clear: internally and externally, its commercial arm Canonical appears to be throwing the idea of community overboard as though it was ballast in a balloon about to crash.' The author points out instances of community discontent and apparent ham-handedness on Mark Shuttleworth's part. Yet isn't this just routine kvetching in the open source community?"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

My ass was just fucked by 2 well-hung niggers (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543261)

My ass was just fucked by 2 well-hung niggers and cum is leaking from my anus. Do I have the AIDS now?

Re:My ass was just fucked by 2 well-hung niggers (-1, Troll)

locotx (559059) | about a year ago | (#45543299)

No but your Ubuntu updates won't work if you upgrade pass version 11

Re:My ass was just fucked by 2 well-hung niggers (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543741)

Does this mean the GNAA is back, and we can look forward to an improvement in the quality of trolling? I hope so, because the latest round of trolls are crap. I miss the glory days when the GNAA wrote stuff that actually related to the articles, or to current events.

Re:My ass was just fucked by 2 well-hung niggers (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45544195)

Dunno, but sounds like you had a good time.

So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (5, Interesting)

bobstreo (1320787) | about a year ago | (#45543291)

It's back to Debian?

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (4, Interesting)

future assassin (639396) | about a year ago | (#45543369)

No we should all go to Linux Mint which will then make a minty fresh Debian version of what Ubuntu Desktop should have been by now,

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (4, Funny)

X0563511 (793323) | about a year ago | (#45543641)

Will then? You're late to the party. [linuxmint.com]

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (5, Insightful)

binarylarry (1338699) | about a year ago | (#45543707)

Does Mint have an independent millionaire sugar daddy supporting it?

Although I'm not sure if that's a pro or a con right now. ;)

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (5, Insightful)

rtb61 (674572) | about a year ago | (#45544333)

What is happening is flavour of the moment in the Linux world is 'Android' and because of that Ubuntu is in the shadows. Rather than fight Android, Ubuntu should embrace Android with an effective USB or wireless remote to enable data input, configuration and synchronisation of Android phones on a full sized desktop screen. Right now the better Ubuntu desktop/notebook plays with Android the more popular it will become, it has a real chance to gain a big chunk of market share by creating a desktop that links well with an Android smartphones and effectively extends it features onto more workable screen real estate.

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (1)

future assassin (639396) | about a year ago | (#45544317)

I know LMDE is there and have used it before but they can still make it what Ubuntu Desktop should have been.

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (5, Funny)

fatphil (181876) | about a year ago | (#45543371)

It's the obvious "backward" step (and I don't mean that in a negative way, retreating from the dark alleyways MS has led U down is a good thing), but most of the people I know who actually liked U have moved sideways to Mint.

(As someone who's been on Debian for well over a decade, all I can say is "humbug!" to the lot of them, what with their fancy schmancy integrated desktop environments and wibbly-wobbly-window transitions, and crap like that.)

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543419)

Porteus for the win!

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543931)

It's the obvious "backward" step (and I don't mean that in a negative way, retreating from the dark alleyways [Mark Shuttleworth] has led [Ubuntu] down is a good thing), but most of the people I know who actually liked [Ubuntu] have moved sideways to Mint.

Mod Parent Up.

When I first found Ubuntu, I was evangelizing it like crazy to friends and family.
There it was, the first Linux that I could recommend to one of those "I don't want to understand it, I just want it to work" Windows XP users.
Sometimes people didn't want to abandon their famliar Windows XP environment.
Others were happy that their computer was now pratically immune to malware.

I continued this up until Ubuntu released Unity as the default desktop.
My mother clicked the button to do a distribution upgrade (I always instructed her to install the updates ASAP), and she called to say "everything changed around on me".
From that point, I decided that Ubuntu had finally jumped the shark [wikipedia.org] .
Now that my mom couldn't use it, I could no longer recommend it to anyone.
I evacuated her data to an external drive, reinstalled the previous Ubuntu, restored her data, and instructed her not to install any updates.

I had her continue this holding pattern until I discovered Linux Mint [linuxmint.com] on DistroWatch [distrowatch.com] . It was at the top of the page hit ranking, so I gave it a try.
Here it was again! The new Linux that I could recommend to the "I don't want to understand it, I just want it to work" Windows XP users.
Even better, since Microsoft totally rearranged everything in Vista / Win 7, nobody was afraid to lose their environment.
In fact, they loved the fact that Linux Mint was close to the Windows XP they loved and far from the unfamiliar Vista / Win 7.
That "don't want to change my computer" has only grown with the release of Windows 8.
Nobody that I know wants to use Windows 8, and everybody to whom I show Mint desperately wants to keep it.

Now Linux Mint is on my mother's computer, my brother's computer, my best friend's computer, my best friend's boyfriend's computer, my girlfriend's laptop, my girlfriend's daughter's laptop, my work laptop, and my home laptop.
I'm not sure who else all those people may have sold on Linux Mint, but they love to show it off (especially my girlfriend, to her friends at college).

I'm sure my story is not unique. Parent is right.
Those of us who liked the old Ubuntu have moved to Mint.
And we've taken our friends and family with us.

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45544073)

I use Mint, Slackware, XP, and Win 7.

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (5, Insightful)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a year ago | (#45544349)

I continued this up until Ubuntu released Unity as the default desktop.

I think this is the main point.

No, contrary to OP, this is not "just the usual Open Source kvetching." Successful Open Source operations listen to their users. Now it's going its own way even further with Mir.

Users were happy with Gnome (or KDE). They did not want Unity, and said so.

By now Ubuntu is too proprietary to be considered "open" anymore. It's not just a Linux distro, but rather it has become its own operating system. That is somewhat contrary to the spirit of Linux. What's next? Its own (proprietary, incompatible) versions of the command-line tools?

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543379)

Some of us never left...

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543397)

I would rather go to Redhat/CentOS if I wasn't happy with Ubuntu, more friendly community than Debian's!

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543585)

But I hate their package manager ! :(

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (2)

CronoCloud (590650) | about a year ago | (#45543781)

Is there really that much difference between:

sudo apt-get install foo

and

sudo yum install foo

That said, there is a yum replacement in the works called "dnf"

From the man page:


DNF is an experimental replacement for Yum, a package manager for RPM
Linux distributions. It aims to maintain CLI compatibility with Yum
while improving on speed and defining strict API and plugin interface.

Four Words (1)

unamanic (997477) | about a year ago | (#45543973)

"Interactive Post Install Configuration"

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (1)

sconeu (64226) | about a year ago | (#45544091)

Or, for Mageia:

sudo urpmi foo

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (1)

jafac (1449) | about a year ago | (#45543475)

Tried it.

"error loading firmwares" - - - having to go back and locate 1, 2, 3, (how many more) proprietary firmwares made installation a bit more painful than I had patience for. (after dealing with Legacy/UEFI boot issues).

Also: latest Debian kernel seems pretty old compared to what ships in the latest ubuntu release.

But I really feel the community drop-off in ubuntu, compared to a couple of years ago. And that's pretty important. They're going the way of Red Hat.

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (3, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | about a year ago | (#45543489)

But I really feel the community drop-off in ubuntu, compared to a couple of years ago. And that's pretty important. They're going the way of Red Hat.

I'm betting Canonical wish they were going the way of Red Hat, with a billion plus of revenue.

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (1)

RabidReindeer (2625839) | about a year ago | (#45544419)

But I really feel the community drop-off in ubuntu, compared to a couple of years ago. And that's pretty important. They're going the way of Red Hat.

I'm betting Canonical wish they were going the way of Red Hat, with a billion plus of revenue.

While I'm OK with the revenue part (I own shares! See me SMILE!!!), this seems to be saying that Red Hat as a platform isn't doing too well. As far as I can tell, Fedora and CentOS are going Great Guns, and Red Hat itself can't be raking in all that cash without doing something right.

Am I missing something? Gnome 3 doesn't count. That particular curse affects more than just Red Hat.

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#45544159)

if latest kernel is so important, Debian experimental repository has them or just follow instructions to compile from source from the big yellow "latest stable" button from kernel.org

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (2)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543591)

I don't see why not. It's what I did, and I'm quite happy with it! :)

Granted, it wasn't until the release of wheezy that Debian suited my needs. A lot of multimedia packages were only available via a third party repository, the distribution packaged versions of the official NVidia drivers were way too old to support my card, and earlier versions wouldn't boot properly on my UEFI/Secure-Boot based machine. That and to be quite frank, the desktop environments and packages in general were just too damn old. :)

As of Wheezy I'm pleased to say that all of those problems have been solved! Wheezy-Backports provides the versions of drivers and firmware that I need to get all my hardware working, plus newer versions of a few essential programs...so the important stuff is out of the way right off the bat. Non-free packages for multimedia and whatnot are available from official repositories of a similar name, so you don't have to add a third party one (although you still can).

Debian certainly requires more knowledge to run than Ubuntu, because in a number of cases I've had to manually compile and install some programs for which a recent version simply wasn't available in wheezy through the normal channels.. However...if you're happily using Ubuntu now, but you don't like the direction Canonical is taking it...by all means give it a try! I did, and it was a pretty comfortable transition :)

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (2)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about a year ago | (#45543659)

It's back to Debian?

Yep, and MATE (gnome2), or XFCE, GNOME3, etc. I don't even have a reason to go with an Ubuntu based distro like Mint.

Re:So we should ditch Ubuntu and then (4, Insightful)

asmkm22 (1902712) | about a year ago | (#45543833)

It's always been Debian for me. I'm grateful for momentum that Ubuntu created, especially in things like wifi drivers, but I've always stuck with Debian (for home, that is).

No it is not kvetching. (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543293)

Ubuntu takes a perfectly good Debian and fucks it up.

They have almost zero feed back to the Linux kernel development or elsewhere.

Recently they have even had the nerve to ask for money to do this hack job.

I have no idea what Mark's idea was with all this but who the hell needs it?

Re:No it is not kvetching. (5, Insightful)

sunderland56 (621843) | about a year ago | (#45543671)

Ubuntu took a perfectly good Debian and fucks it up.

Ubuntu took a perfectly good Ubuntu and fucked it up. Luckily, there are distros like Xubuntu - which take the good parts, and leave off the bad parts (aka Unity).

Canonical Needs to Make Money (5, Insightful)

segedunum (883035) | about a year ago | (#45543313)

That much has become clear for quite a while now. What's also become clear is they don't know how to do it, what direction they're in and they're unusual recent behaviour is just a bunch of initial death throes.

Re:Canonical Needs to Make Money (3, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | about a year ago | (#45543349)

Ubuntu seems to be trying to lock users in with many of its recent changes, but has just succeeded in pushing users away.

Re:Canonical Needs to Make Money (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543949)

Yes, I feel so locked in, what with my choices of Ubuntu, or Ubuntu Gnome, or Kubuntu, or Lubuntu, or Xubuntu, or any of the many derivatives of Ubuntu that's out there. And it's all just an "sudo apt-get install" away from appearing on my machine. It's smothering, I tell you!

Re:Canonical Needs to Make Money (2)

0123456 (636235) | about a year ago | (#45543999)

If you're going to have to switch to an Ubuntu sub-distro in order to get the configuration you want, why not just go the whole hog and switch to a non-Ubuntu distro?

Re:Canonical Needs to Make Money (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45544163)

I never said I wanted to move away from Ubuntu, but if I did it's very easy to switch. No distros I've used in the previous five years have even come close to the polish that Ubuntu provides. The stability of a Debian distro coupled with the desire to release a free operating system that could rival the ease of use and polish of a system from Apple is what drew me to Ubuntu in the first place. Hits and misses have occurred within the project, but there's nothing out there I've seen that convinces me to switch.

Re:Canonical Needs to Make Money (1)

DavidClarkeHR (2769805) | about a year ago | (#45543405)

That much has become clear for quite a while now. What's also become clear is they don't know how to do it, what direction they're in and they're unusual recent behaviour is just a bunch of initial death throes.

Sorry, I thought you meant they didn't know how to throw their users overboard properly. You know, the way Apple and Microsoft do, with almost every unnecessary software (and hardware) update.

bad @ biz (1)

globaljustin (574257) | about a year ago | (#45543533)

What's also become clear is they don't know how to do it

right

my question: Has any Linux distro ever been clear that they *do* know how to Make Money?

I think Ubuntu and Canonical could *certainly* have made a profit, but that's my opinion. I think **I** could make them profitable if they were my companies...maybe something similar to a Mozilla model w/ my own twist of course ;)

what I'm asking is about the general consensus...is there a way that is common knowledge that these companies like cannonical ignore or is it more abstract than that?

what's an example of a profitable linux distro company?

Re:bad @ biz (4, Interesting)

0123456 (636235) | about a year ago | (#45543583)

what's an example of a profitable linux distro company?

Red Hat are profitable, aren't they?

Canonical could have built a 'just works' Linux distro that people would have paid for, but they felt the need to go all Jobs on their users' asses instead. So most moved to Mint. Guess they'll have to move to the Debian version of Mint when Ubuntu goes away.

Re:bad @ biz (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45544041)

Red Hat is the Microsoft of the Linux world. When they eventually own (own as acting as gatekeepers to core projects) the whole stack, there won't be any room for startups like Canonical to come in an offer alternative technologies. Pretty soon Debian will die because it will become redundant since they'll just be packaging the same stuff from Fedora. They can barely keep up with the patching necessary in order to support systemd and Gnome while giving their users a choice of different technologies to use instead. As Red Hat makes everything more tightly interdependent on technologies which it produces, distros like Debian won't be able keep up.

Re:bad @ biz (4, Funny)

JonJ (907502) | about a year ago | (#45544433)

Hahahahahahaha, what the actual fuck.

Re:bad @ biz (2)

demachina (71715) | about a year ago | (#45543957)

What exactly is this Mozilla model that works so well? Besides charity from Google I mean. I wonder if Google keeps Firefox alive just to avoid antitrust issues with Chrome.

Re:bad @ biz (3, Interesting)

AdamWill (604569) | about a year ago | (#45544361)

It's not charity, it's a perfectly reasonable business arrangement. Firefox still has a good 30% or so of all web users. _All web users_. That's a massive number of people. Being Firefox's default search engine is worth a significant amount of money to Google, and Google pays a significant amount of money for it. If Google didn't, I'm sure Yahoo or Microsoft would.

Re:Canonical Needs to Make Money (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about a year ago | (#45543549)

I think the best way would have been to ask for money ... before pissing their most likely contributors off with their Amazon search stunt. They really don't seem to get it. A large percentage of Linux users appreciate privacy ... they send search results to Amazon. A large percentage of Linux users appreciate options ... they switch to Unity and take the Apple attitude of "we know what's best for you".

So... (4, Insightful)

TWX (665546) | about a year ago | (#45543321)

...it'll fork, and life will go on.

What's the big deal?

Re:So... (2)

bob_super (3391281) | about a year ago | (#45543401)

Slow news day, and a quota of Linux stories that was unfulfilled for today, to they duped last week's "bashBuntu", since it worked pretty well.

Re:So... (2)

CodeReign (2426810) | about a year ago | (#45543579)

You could even say the "forked" last weeks bashBuntu post

Re:So... (1)

im_thatoneguy (819432) | about a year ago | (#45543409)

I think the big deal that we never want to admit is that the success of a project usually isn't from the community. We like to think we're the critical component when in reality most of the important work is being done by the benevolent overlord.

Sure we could fork Android for instance... but it wouldn't advance very quickly and it would be garbage compared to the Google helmed branch.

Re:So... (2)

Nerdfest (867930) | about a year ago | (#45543587)

I'd love it if they took Linux further, unfortunately, in trying to accelerate their financial success, they're damaging Ubuntu's longer term viability. Has MArk been hanging around with too many corporate CEOs?

Re:So... (2)

tftp (111690) | about a year ago | (#45543493)

...it'll fork, and life will go on. What's the big deal?

The fork is available already. I prefer Mint with KDE. Usable and pleasant to work with. I haven't touched the Ubuntu proper from the day they pushed Unity and I tried it. Since then they carefully coded additional privacy-destroying functions, and of course I am not interested.

Re:So... (1)

TigerTime (626140) | about a year ago | (#45543681)

"will fork"??.... it already has. And while i'm sure it's been done numerous times, one of the most popular is Linux Mint. It a much more streamlined OS and I think they're really growing to a point where they're leaving the shadows of their initial Ubuntu roots.

Much ado about nothing (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543333)

I don't fancy unity or ubuntu as such - there's just so many *better* alternatives, so I don't particularly care. What I want to know is, even if the Ubuntu are burning bridges, why should we care? Or was this aimed at Ubuntu users? Somehow I got the feeling that the users like Mark/Canonicals decisions... otherwise they'd not be users, no?

Re:Much ado about nothing (1)

tftp (111690) | about a year ago | (#45543601)

Somehow I got the feeling that the users like Mark/Canonicals decisions... otherwise they'd not be users, no?

To properly determine the answer to that you need to explore the limit of the function \lim_{users \to 0} \frac{likes}{users} :-)

Re:Much ado about nothing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45544245)

Think smear campaign to damage the brand while Canonical is trying to shore up cellphone hardware manufactures to use Ubuntu Touch.

As for Free and Open Software... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543343)

... a lot of people are way too vocal on what one should or not do with it.

Yet isn't this just routine kvetching? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543357)

kvetching

There you go. Dismiss it. Let us know how that goes for you.

Shame really. Upstart is nice. I've landed on systemd systems because of Shuttleworth, however.

Good will is more important than your vision, Mark. You're killing your own, platform. And I can't figure out why. You're years past your own deadline for profitability, yet here you are, beating this horse to death while people evacuate. WTF??

I switched to CentOS and never looked back (5, Informative)

rovitotv (65942) | about a year ago | (#45543359)

The stability of CentOS is great. I don't get all the fancy features but I don't want those anyway as they just get in the way. At work when we need something supported we just use RedHat and pay for the support. Moving development between CentOS and RedHat is totally transparent to me.

Re:I switched to CentOS and never looked back (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543485)

Except every time you need to do an upgrade. ;)

C'mon RedHat/CentOS recommends you don't do an in-place upgrade.

CentOS is also 100% tied to the other evil linux corporation, RedHat.

Lots of great free distributions without corporate influence: Debian, Gentoo, Slackware, and their non-corporate derivatives.

Re:I switched to CentOS and never looked back (2)

0123456 (636235) | about a year ago | (#45543615)

C'mon RedHat/CentOS recommends you don't do an in-place upgrade.

Uh, what? I've been doing in-place upgrades on my CentOS machine since 2008.

Sure, you can't do major version upgrades in place, but minor version upgrades are painless. Ubuntu tries to allow you to do major upgrades in place, but after a year or two you have to reinstall to clear out the crud.

Re:I switched to CentOS and never looked back (1)

marcansoft (727665) | about a year ago | (#45543795)

Meanwhile, I've been running the same Gentoo install for ~9 years now (having migrated through 5 different machines). Rolling upgrades are awesome.

(It would be >10 years, but I did have to reinstall early on to migrate from x86 to x86-64).

Re:I switched to CentOS and never looked back (1)

AdamWill (604569) | about a year ago | (#45544397)

And I've been running rolling Fedora dev versions for three years, and before that I ran Mandriva Cooker for years. Any geek _can_ keep any given distro rolling on their personal desktop, it's not that difficult to do. Making an OS that you sell to real people for extremely large amounts of money to do mission critical work on across thousands of machines robust enough that you can recommend in-place upgrades for major releases is an _extremely_ different kettle of fish.

We don't _recommend_ upgrades between major versions of RHEL, but you could do it, if you wanted to. It's not like the capability isn't there; it's just packages. We just don't suggest it's the best idea, and doing so has support implications if you have a paid support contract.

Re:I switched to CentOS and never looked back (1)

gmack (197796) | about a year ago | (#45544085)

Ubuntu tries to allow you to do major upgrades in place, but after a year or two you have to reinstall to clear out the crud.

Say what? Unless something has really changed between Debian and Ubuntu there really shouldn't be much crud being built i`since it provides a remove feature for obsolete dependencies. I have been running Debian for over a decade and I only reinstall for server replacement or corrupted drives.

Re:I switched to CentOS and never looked back (1)

0123456 (636235) | about a year ago | (#45544549)

Good for you. Twice I've had Ubuntu just crash in the middle of an upgrade, leaving it in who knows what state. They remove software you've been using for years, so anything on the system relying on it no longer works, and other software requires database changes which may or may not fully work.

Besides which, installing the new version and then copying over any modified configuration is often much faster than the hours and hours an in-place upgrade requires. That's OK if you can leave it unattended overnight, but then you get up at 8am and see it crashed and have to try to fix it before you go to work.

Re:I switched to CentOS and never looked back (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about a year ago | (#45543695)

What's evil about RedHat?

Re:I switched to CentOS and never looked back (3, Interesting)

Billly Gates (198444) | about a year ago | (#45543767)

Yeah so evil.

So evil for a company to provide jobs, QA, have someone answer calls, assist corporate users, and do things like the above where volunteers can not.

There is a reason people use CentOS and Redhat. They work and are guaranteed to work where I would be fired if something went down. Redhat works with OEMs and hardware makers and creates a stable environment to test and optimize so my server I buy will work guaranteed. Sorry but the college frat boys working on this junior level class making a GNU driver for fun and credits wont count if my boss needs something to work.

I find it laughable that those who say corporations are evil work for one. Try not working for one and contributing back and see how far you get ahead in life?

Re:I switched to CentOS and never looked back (1)

CronoCloud (590650) | about a year ago | (#45543809)

C'mon RedHat/CentOS recommends you don't do an in-place upgrade.

What? I've done at least 4 in place Fedora Upgrades.

Re:I switched to CentOS and never looked back (1)

RabidReindeer (2625839) | about a year ago | (#45544503)

C'mon RedHat/CentOS recommends you don't do an in-place upgrade.

What? I've done at least 4 in place Fedora Upgrades.

Yes, but I've also been nailed when the in-place upgrade didn't check to see if there was enough free disk space in the boot partition first.

CentOS policy on upgrade-in-place is generally "Yes, some people are doing this. You can too, if you're brave enough. But since we're the free version of Enterprise Linux and enterprises prefer solid guarantees, we're not brave enough to do that, since Red Hat doesn't want to risk it."

There have been 1 or 2 CentOS releases where I think that major-version upgrades were formally blessed, but not from v5 to v6. Minor version upgrade-in-place does work on CentOS 9 to 10. I don't think you even had to explicitly request it.

Re:I switched to CentOS and never looked back (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543923)

> C'mon RedHat/CentOS recommends you don't do an in-place upgrade

You're being too kind. It's not that they don't recommend it. They don't allow version upgrades at all. You can do minor updates, but upgrading to a new version has never been allowed.

It really sucks because I'm setting up about 200 Red Hat 6.4 servers, and I know by the time I finish and get everything running with production traffic, Red Hat will release 7 and not allow me to upgrade them even though we have a very expensive service contract. That happened when I installed 5.5 in Oct 2010 and less than a month later Red Hat released 6.0 so I have a ton of 5.5 servers I can't upgrade without wiping and starting over again. It's not like my desktop system that I had Windows 3.0 on when I started working here in May 1991, and I have upgraded it to every new version of Windows until I stopped at Vista. Other than the Windows 2000 upgrade that lost a bunch of minor settings (like the desktop background color), every upgrade has worked flawlessly. It's sad that Red Hat can't get their act together enough to allow upgrades like that.

While it's very stable, the main reason most companies I know can't use CentOS/Red Hat is because of the ancient library versions. They're still using glibc 2.12 even in 6.4. Every single damn piece of commercial software we use requires 2.14 or newer so I'm stuck having to support Debian unstable in addition to Red Hat. Even Google Dart doesn't run on Red Hat. If Red Hat 7.x supports glibc version 2.14 or newer then we'll be buying about a hundred more copies of it.

Re:I switched to CentOS and never looked back (4, Informative)

msobkow (48369) | about a year ago | (#45543497)

Oracle "Unbreakable" Linux, on the other hand, was broken by one of their updates within 3 months of me installing it. Fedora wouldn't run what I needed. Ubuntu messed me up with a system update, so I'm back on Debian myself.

I'd rather run slightly older stable software than the latest bleeding edge and losing my system.

Re:I switched to CentOS and never looked back (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | about a year ago | (#45543841)

You may want to research the differences between .debs and RPMs?

I use RPM distros for these reasons as things break less and I can uninstall rpms cleanly with the right tools with YUM.

Also Oracle steals from Redhat and I wouldn't be surprised if they use different build settings too. CentOS is slower to release updates compared to Scientific Linux because it tries to be binary compatibility as possible with the exact build process and scripts for all the tools.

This shouldn't be an issue for FOSS software but crappy corporate stuff sometimes does not use any autoconf or automake files at all! Just some shell script that invokes gcc directly or a simplified make so any change will hit it . Debian will suffer an even worse problem.

 

Re:I switched to CentOS and never looked back (0)

msobkow (48369) | about a year ago | (#45544093)

Care to explain how to do that when the machine has been so screwed up it won't boot to the new kernel or the old one any more?

RedHat based distros have fucked me over and over and over. Your "argument" is bullshit. They're not "better" by any stretch of the imagination.

Re:I switched to CentOS and never looked back (0)

JonJ (907502) | about a year ago | (#45544451)

Your argument is bullshit as well, considering it's your anectodal evidence, which is likely to be you fucking up.

Re:CentOS == win 7 of linux (2)

Billly Gates (198444) | about a year ago | (#45543701)

Older, more mature, and runs everything guaranteed.

Kind of like XP is too some of the die hards who refuse to upgrade. I started to like Windows 7 again after Gnome 3/Unity and realized it really is not a bad OS anymore.

I also fell in love with CentOS again too and run it on a VM with FreeBSD if I want some hacking with things like smtp trace and ipf for my virtual networks.

RPM is not bad folks! Many of us in the 1990s had nightmares trying to get gnome 1 working with 1 million plus RPMs and therefore refuse to touch that POS AGAIN!! I was one of them, but my AMD hardware does not work well with debian distros. They work fine with redhat kernels. RPM > DEB. With Yum it is like apt-get and that was the last hurdle. .Debs leave crap all over your system when you uninstall. RPMs remove cleanly and I like the admin tools better. With yum there is no rpm hell like before.

Re:I switched to CentOS and never looked back (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543747)

CentOS is nice, but I see it as more a workstation distro - particularly useful for our machines at work but I wouldn't use it for my personal desktop/laptop at home. For my personal machine I like having the latest software and the greatest amount of software prepackaged (i.e. repos), which is why I prefer Linux Mint as it leverages the Ubuntu repos and PPAs while adding in the useful stuff in the box while removing the BS Canonical thinks will help them in the desktop arena. But to each their own.

Re:I switched to CentOS and never looked back (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45544217)

The stability of CentOS is great. I don't get all the fancy features but I don't want those anyway as they just get in the way. At work when we need something supported we just use RedHat and pay for the support. Moving development between CentOS and RedHat is totally transparent to me.

And I switched to Scientific Linux (another RHEL 6 clone) at work, and it (like CentOS) is fantastic. I'm very keen to see RHEL 7 released, so you and I can get on with CentOS 7 and Scientific 7.

I'm dreaming of Scientific Linux 7, the stability, and then throwing Mate 1.6 on top of it. That's a desktop that'll be built like a brick shithouse: built to last. At home I'm running Slackware 14.1 with Mate and it's awesome. Clean, somewhat modern (or 'modern enough for my needs'), not buggy, and very very quick.

Slackware (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543391)

Slackware forever.

Re:Slackware (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543869)

I know your trolling but it's funny you should bring that up, slackware is also not a community run OS, it's run by pretty much one person and when he's gone who knows what will happen with it,...

How come nobody talks about SUSE anymore? (1)

Spy Handler (822350) | about a year ago | (#45543413)

Did Novell buy it and fuck it up? Or...?

Re:How come nobody talks about SUSE anymore? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543505)

I think Attachmate is slowly but surely separating SUSE from the rest of Novell. Primary development has always been in Germany as far as I'm aware and SUSE has a stronger place in the enterprise world than Lennart and the rest of the Red Hat gang would have you know. In the growing Linux on System z market (mostly financial) SUSE is king, Red Hat (the other IBM certified distro) is far from as sorted as SLES. From a desktop perspective they lost my interest when they moved to systemd.

Re:How come nobody talks about SUSE anymore? (1)

CronoCloud (590650) | about a year ago | (#45543843)

From a desktop perspective they lost my interest when they moved to systemd.

Why? From a "desktop user" perspective it doesn't make a difference. You can even use the old "service" commands if you want.

Re:How come nobody talks about SUSE anymore? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543529)

afaik SUSE has been spun-off Novell and is now a seperate venture. And we don't talk about it because it works just fine and no one at SUSE is busy inventing conflict like Mark is. Might as well ask why we're not talking about Mandriva anymore... (or is that openMandriva now? or Mageia? I get so confused..) I think we *do* need to talk about Mandrake's offspring, perhaps I'd be less confused that way.

Re:How come nobody talks about SUSE anymore? (1)

AdamWill (604569) | about a year ago | (#45544411)

"Might as well ask why we're not talking about Mandriva anymore... (or is that openMandriva now? or Mageia? I get so confused..)"

All of the above. Plus Rosa.

Re:How come nobody talks about SUSE anymore? (4, Insightful)

bored (40072) | about a year ago | (#45544225)

The latest version opensuse actually is the best linux I have ever run, and that counts for a lot having run every major distribution since when the kernel was in the .9x timefame. That also includes all the recent versions of Ubuntu/mint/etc. It falls closer to the "it just works" mantra than any previous version (of course a few things still have hickups).

No one talks about Suse because we are off talking about more exciting things. That is the problem with having a stable sensible distribution that actually works.... Its doesn't have the latest $sexy to ignite peoples fires, or the latest $sucky to piss everyone off.

Personally, I suspect a fair number of people drop suse when they thought KDE jumped the shark a few years back. Now that it turns out its Gnome that jumped the shark no one remembers the one remaining major KDE based distribution.

Finally, there is SLES which is all the goodness of opensuse combined with long term vendor support as good as what is provided by redhat.

I'll never be a greedy businessman (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543431)

intent only on making a fortune, says the greedy businessman as he tries to make his fortune.

Moral: Never place too much trust or respect in a CEO of a private company.

Trust a greedy(sic) businessman (1)

tuppe666 (904118) | about a year ago | (#45543875)

intent only on making a fortune, says the greedy businessman as he tries to make his fortune.

Moral: Never place too much trust or respect in a CEO of a private company.

Except most here are pretty happy with Ubuntu wanting to make money. The (recent) direction Ubuntu is taken is a unified ecosystem across platforms, and some of us think that result is not pretty...but the stable;cutting edge; pretty desktop we loved. Personally I always thought they should have got their store and by extension games sorted before Humble/Bundle and Steam got themselves together, and their approach to Music has been uninspired.

Pursuit of Money should not only be considered healthy buy encouraged.

Not every company can act like Apple (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543439)

Cannonical is another failing company with Steve Jobs/Apple's attitude of "We will tell you what you like, and will like it." Everything from putting the window close button on the left hand side of the panel, to Unity, enabled by default Amazon search lens, and now Mir have been completely unilateral moves with no input from the community whether that decision meets the users wants or needs.

Re:Not every company can act like Apple (5, Insightful)

mysidia (191772) | about a year ago | (#45543865)

Cannonical is another failing company with Steve Jobs/Apple's attitude of "We will tell you what you like, and will like it."

The attitude can be highly effective ---- but there is one minor important detail: You have to actually be right, for things to work out.

If your UI turns out to be a turd, then you will go down.

Seeking innovation is a high-reward, high-risk thing.

Re:Not every company can act like Apple (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45544477)

The truth is that you faggot dick smokers like to be against the norm. That's the only reason you're into Linux in the first place. Now that Linux is picking up momentum you need to look edgy again so you're moving on to another distro. That's your current attempt at looking fresh and hip. If Linux ever gets bigger than Apple you faggots will all run for Mac Book Pros and act like you were a hipster all along.
 
Fucking shit eaters.

Unpopular decisions (4, Interesting)

tuppe666 (904118) | about a year ago | (#45543527)

Lets be honest this is more about Mir and Unity(and maybe Amazon integration for a few of us), being promoted over *Alternatives* and both have been discussed on and off topic to death. Whatever you personally think of these choices, users currently have a choice of Desktop(and I am still not going to choose Unity), and Mir is still a twinkle Shuttleworth's eye. I am personally using the very polished Xubuntu(promoted by the Cinnamon split from Gmone), which smooths over the clash between GTK2/3, and other than a stupid oversight with the volume indicator. Has been the best desktop I have ever used...and yes I do miss a few Gnome features, but it has its own to love, and I am in love with Gmusicbrowser.

The bottom line it is still is the no brainer Linux install...unless you are wedded to (the still wonderful) Cinnamon (personally I am keeping my eye on Cut http://cut.debian.net/ [debian.net] ), I wish Canonical all the luck with their phone, If they can wed themselves to decent Chinese manufacturer that can produce low cost phones. It may be my next phone.

I've started giving up on it (1)

Dega704 (1454673) | about a year ago | (#45543593)

It's easy to see why Linux Mint has been increasingly blazing their own separate trail. I tried Ubuntu 13.10 and liked it in some ways, but got extremely turned off when I spent an hour trying to customize the executed command on a Unity launcher to no avail. Making the interface simple to use is great, but that should never come at the cost of functionality, and there is no reason for it to.

Getting to be a usual thing... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543617)

The 'linux communities' have all devolved into petty little fiefdoms of some degree.

It's no wonder the masses don't want to get into that mess.
They just want an OS. Not a lifestyle or even try to keep up.

Not a Linux User Then (4, Informative)

tuppe666 (904118) | about a year ago | (#45543763)

The 'linux communities' have all devolved into petty little fiefdoms of some degree.

Except its a lie, As both a Gentoo and a Ubuntu user. I have enjoyed massive support both though chat and forums, and bug reports. In fact on a whole most OS communities are pretty helpful including those of Windows/Mac. People on the whole like to help.

Re:Not a Linux User Then (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543913)

Except its a lie, As both a Gentoo and a Ubuntu user.

Hardly - I'll give you partial credit for Gentoo, because god damn but those loonies know how to write documentation...

But Ubuntu? Ubuntu is the same as every other Linux distribution - isolated as fuck. You really going to get help with upgrading your RHEL installation in the Ubuntu forums? No, you're not. You really going to trust RHEL-centric folks to discuss best practices on your Ubuntu system? Only if you're a fool.

Re:Not a Linux User Then (2)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#45544189)

not true, most issues and fixes are found in the entire Debian -> Ubuntu -> derived distro (e.g. Mint) space. Use Mint at home, we have Ubuntu and Debian servers at work.....no problem to find answers to anything that has come up thus far.

Debatable decline? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543861)

The idea that Ubuntu is in decline, at least from the point of view of number of users, is not debatable, it is false. Ubuntu's numbers are up and steadily climbing. They may or may not be ignoring the community (I would argue they aren't given all of the community initiatives and offerings from Canonical of late) but whatever the Ubuntu team is doing is working for them. Their installation numbers are up.

Re:Debatable decline? (2)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#45544207)

do you have sources for that assertion? Googling "ubuntu in decline" pulls up a number of interesting recent articles that claim the opposite from polls, distrowatch, etc.

Aaron Toponce and Benjamin Krensa (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45543917)

aren't developers for Ubuntu. They maintained no packages in Ubuntu, and contributed no code to any part of Ubuntu or its derivatives. They're simply Ubuntu members.

Elementary OS (4, Interesting)

sydsavage (453743) | about a year ago | (#45543967)

I hadn't heard about Elementary OS until this Wired write up [wired.com] yesterday. Out of curiosity, I tried it out in VirtualBox just to have a look at it. And yup, it's pretty, and simple, and it's not Unity. I considering giving it a try for real on my workstation, but it kind of barfed on my nfs shared home directory, so I think I'll pass for now. That has been my most current pet peeve; distributions that do not respect the 'Unix Way' of doing things, like having a network mounted home directory, so all my files and preferences go with me to which ever machine I log into on the network. I had just wrestled with Shotwell refusing to import some photos in my nfs home, and since the article talked up EOS's tight integration with all things Yorba, the authors of Shotwell, I didn't really want to go down that road. I did try out Yorba's email client, and liked it enough to install it on my Ubuntu machine. And it seems to work just fine so far with my networked home.

Anyhow, if you want to see what Wired is calling the Apple of Linux OSes, take a gander at Elementary OS [elementaryos.org] . I can appreciate them striving for the 'Just Works' mantra, but it needs to 'Just Work' with the tried and true ways of doing things that Unix and friends have enjoyed for decades now.

And I'm not saying that it completely fails at an nfs mounted home directory, but it was competing with Ubuntu's settings (where that home directory mounts on my real machine) for simple things like the desktop wallpaper. I imagine it can be made to play nice, but I wasn't looking to spend time tweaking yet another distro to get things to work the way I want them to.

Re:Elementary OS (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#45544265)

NFS is hardly tried and true. NFS always has had numerous issues where a mounted filesystem isn't quite like a local one (AFS is better for the 'unix way', as aside)

anyway, use Samba. it sucks less than NFS, and I speak as LONG time unix admin. I'm older than Unix.

Re:Elementary OS (1)

0123456 (636235) | about a year ago | (#45544499)

anyway, use Samba. it sucks less than NFS, and I speak as LONG time unix admin. I'm older than Unix.

Because there are absolutely no issues with Samba files not being quite like a local filesystem.

The rise of anti-Linux .. (1)

codeusirae (3036835) | about a year ago | (#45544161)

"most Microsoft Haters apparently assume their stance largely as a rebellion. They seem to take their identity from their opposition. And, in extreme cases, could be described as conspiracy theorists" link [datamation.com]

And straight from the mother ship ..

I’m thinking of hitting the OEMs harder than in the past with anti-Linux they should do a delicate dance”, Joachim Kempin, Microsoft [theregister.co.uk]
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?