[wellylug] NZ Ubuntu Repository

Tue May 22 11:43:47 NZST 2007

Well, this is a misunderstanding - Ubuntu does not keep packages up to 
date w/regard to new versions in their repositories - they keep packages 
shipped with a major version as bug-free and stable as possible.

Firefox 2.0 won't go into Dapper as 'firefox' because firefox is used by 
approximately 190 other packages that use it's rendering engine etc.  It 
could theoretically go in as 'firefox2', and install alongside 1.5 but 
apparently nobody at Ubuntu is prepared to allow this to happen.

Which is unfortunate, but somewhat understandable. You can't go 'drawing 
a line in the sand' for long term support and then just blatantly ignore 
it by introducing 190 new packages each of which might not actually be 
compatible with firefox 2.x.

You can't just pull out the ones that break because you shipped them in 
an LTS release. You can put in firefox2, and change the other packages 
to depend on firefox2 as they get updated, but then you have to test all 
that and you have people asking why their Gecko-based browser (yelp) 
doesn't do the stuff their firefox, or other gecko app (epiphany, ported 
to firefox 2) does. You break consistency, and introduce bloat by having 
2 versions of the firefox libraries on your machine.

Is this worse than not having firefox 2.0 at all? -  In my opinion, no - 
firefox2 should go into Dapper LTS, but thats just me.

Part of the blame for this mess rests with Firefox, who's APIs and 
libraries are not backwards compatible with extensions and Gecko-based 
apps that run on previous versions.

Unfortunately its very difficult to tell the entire open source software 
industry how to structure their packaging and interoperability 
practices, so we're stuck with situations such as Dapper LTS.

Using something like Automatix (http://www.getautomatix.com/) to install 
swiftfox (optimised firefox) might be a 'clicky' solution for your 
users, but official Ubuntu support for new versions of packages will be 
non-existent on Dapper LTS.

-Pete

> There is the issue of 700megs (broadband) as against 10 or so (can be 
> done on dialup), and if you have more than one machine and tend to 
> share stuff around you have the problem of having to use a cd which 
> means backing up and recovering the machine afterwards.
> For my circumstances doing major upgrades more than once a year is 
> pretty tricky and for the people I help (including me) they might put 
> up with me trying to get new or upgraded applications into their 
> machines but not a 6 monthly remake.
> I have been telling people that 6.06 is a very good stable OS and they 
> can update the rest as the mood takes them because the repository will 
> stay up to date. It doesn't.
>
> On 5/22/07, *Rob Collins* <robcollins55 at aim.com 
> <mailto:robcollins55 at aim.com>> wrote:
>
>     I've got very limited knowledge of the inner workings of (k)ubuntu
>     but wasn't at all keen to upgrade from Edgy to Feisty after a
>     fiasco I had trying to upgrade from Dapper to Edgy.  That was
>     until upgrading to Feisty happened almost accidentally after I
>     enabled a repository for something else.  Up popped a GUI
>     upgrading tool out of nowhere and I have to be honest with you,
>     upgrading was as easy as falling off a log, no knowledge of Linux
>     required - and that's coming from a sceptic!"
>
>     If it's that easy these days, why not just keep up with the latest
>     version of the OS if you want the latest of the programs running
>     on it?
>
>     Rob
>
>     jeffhunt90 at gmail.com <mailto:jeffhunt90 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>     I thought I was a pretty conservative bloke, but you folks are
>>     making me feel positively innovative. I gave up on Edgy because
>>     its dialup was shonky and I gave up on Feisty because I couldn't
>>     get it into anything - (I think that was hardware faults, but it
>>     wasn't worth the effort).
>>     Under the impression that I was supposed to be keeping up to date
>>     I have been getting new software whenever I felt the need and
>>     installing it, usually off a binary.
>>     Apart from destroying hundreds of hours of family genealogy when
>>     I upgraded Gramps ( its ok I recovered on another machine) I have
>>     never had a problem. Yesterday I wasted hours finding a shell
>>     script to do the deed of getting Firefox updated so I could view
>>     SVG graphics. It now works.
>>     If I can do these things with greater than 95% success rate,
>>     surely someone with access to source code and inside knowledge
>>     can compile something like Firefox, check it doesn't transgress
>>     and put it into the Ubuntu 6.06 repository.
>>
>>     I do feel that the 'big two' Firefox and Open Office should be
>>     being updated even if there has to be a new category called
>>     somehting like 'stable we think' (a bit stable?) (not too unstable?)
>>     Cheers.
>>
>>     On 5/22/07, *Jethro Carr* <jethro.carr at jethrocarr.com
>>     <mailto:jethro.carr at jethrocarr.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 09:06 +1200, Pete Black wrote:
>>         > Its better to simply understand this, than to be given a
>>         bunch of
>>         > alternatives like 'maintain newer versions of packages by
>>         compiling
>>         > yourself', which very few people really enjoy doing.
>>         Basically, if
>>         > you like Ubuntu, but want new software, and aren't prepared
>>         to futz
>>         > around with apt.conf entries, then upgrade to the newer releases
>>         > regularly. This might potentially (though it seems to be
>>         less likely
>>         > with each release - update quality is improving noticeably)
>>         break
>>         > your system, but if you're going to be using Ubuntu long
>>         term, its
>>         > best to wrestle with the beast and get somewhat comfortable
>>         with this
>>         > process. LTS is not a good option unless you want to use the
>>         packages
>>         > delivered with the release long term.
>>
>>         I would state that many users actually want to use their
>>         computers long
>>         term! :-)
>>
>>         Even I don't upgrade every 6 months, because if I have all
>>         the features
>>         I need, why upgrade?
>>
>>         If you want the latest and greatest of everything, then sure,
>>         go and
>>         upgrade. But Ubuntu LTS is an excellent choice for users
>>         wanting a
>>         stable system that they don't need to upgrade for a few years.
>>
>>         --
>>         Jethro Carr
>>
>>         www.jethrocarr.com <http://www.jethrocarr.com>
>>         www.jethrocarr.com/index.php?cms=blog
>>         <http://www.jethrocarr.com/index.php?cms=blog>
>>
>>
>>
>>         --
>>         Wellington Linux Users Group Mailing List:
>>         wellylug at lists.wellylug.org.nz
>>         <mailto:wellylug at lists.wellylug.org.nz>
>>         To Leave:  
>>         http://lists.wellylug.org.nz/mailman/listinfo/wellylug
>>
>>
>>
>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>       
>
>
>     --
>     Wellington Linux Users Group Mailing List:
>     wellylug at lists.wellylug.org.nz <mailto:wellylug at lists.wellylug.org.nz>
>     To Leave:   http://lists.wellylug.org.nz/mailman/listinfo/wellylug
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>   