[wellylug] NZ Ubuntu Repository

[Daniel Pittman]

Pete Black <pete at marchingcubes.com> writes:

> Its quite possible to selectively install newer packages from more
> recent ubuntu distros (e.g. just pull a specific package from feisty)
> but this approach will not work well where compatibility-breaking
> changes have been introduced, 

Actually, it doesn't work terribly well even then.  Newer versions of
packages compiled in the newer release will tend to pull in a newer
version of libc or libz -- and then you need to upgrade *everything*.

Common wisdom in the Debian world, forever, has been: don't try to run a
mix of stable and unstable or stable and testing.  You *will* regret it.

The same can be said of Ubuntu releases, though with marginally less
risk as their are closer together.

[...]

> Being an Ubuntu user with modern versions of packages really requires
> a complete upgrade every 6 months or so, 

No, it doesn't, except where by "modern" you mean "released within the
last six months."

I am quite happy that, for example, a system running Dapper has
sufficiently "modern" packages to meet the needs of running a server.

Edgy is sufficiently "modern" that the desktop packages did everything I
wanted from a machine for quite some time.

Your millage on "modern" definitely does vary.

[...]

> Still, if you want to pick and choose from the very latest Linux
> software and have it all 'just work', i'd say thats still not within
> the reach of the non-expert user.

That is very true -- because you *can't* have "stable" and "the latest,"
those two being rather contradictory notions.  The latest software is
inherently unstable, especially in combination with other software,
because we have not yet worked out all the odd edges and interactions.

> 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. 

I disagree.  It is better, for some values of better, to accept that you
don't actually need the bleeding edge version of anything to get you
work done in almost every case.

It may be nice, it may keep you busy, it may keep your life fun ... but
it isn't actually necessary in most cases.


Additionally, while few people enjoy managing their own software
compilation it is -- where you genuinely need to track a package that
closely -- generally essential.  

A distribution, catering to everyone, isn't going to care about your
particular corner case.  Heck, you are lucky they care as much about the
latest Firefox as they do, in many ways, because it is a big time and
bug sink. ;)

> 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. 

You could s/Ubuntu/any Linux distribution/ and be strictly accurate in
this -- Fedora Core isn't really that much better at updating within a
release, no?

> 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 think it is a bit early to be drawing that conclusion, but it is at
least vaguely true.

Regards,
        Daniel
-- 
Digital Infrastructure Solutions -- making IT simple, stable and secure
Phone: 0401 155 707        email: contact at digital-infrastructure.com.au
                 http://digital-infrastructure.com.au/