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).
<br>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.<br>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.
<br>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.<br><br>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?)
<br>Cheers.<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 5/22/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Jethro Carr</b> <<a href="mailto:jethro.carr@jethrocarr.com">jethro.carr@jethrocarr.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 09:06 +1200, Pete Black wrote:<br>> Its better to simply understand this, than to be given a bunch of<br>> alternatives like 'maintain newer versions of packages by compiling<br>> yourself', which very few people really enjoy doing. Basically, if
<br>> you like Ubuntu, but want new software, and aren't prepared to futz<br>> around with apt.conf entries, then upgrade to the newer releases<br>> regularly. This might potentially (though it seems to be less likely
<br>> with each release - update quality is improving noticeably) break<br>> your system, but if you're going to be using Ubuntu long term, its<br>> best to wrestle with the beast and get somewhat comfortable with this
<br>> process. LTS is not a good option unless you want to use the packages<br>> delivered with the release long term.<br><br>I would state that many users actually want to use their computers long<br>term! :-)<br><br>
Even I don't upgrade every 6 months, because if I have all the features<br>I need, why upgrade?<br><br>If you want the latest and greatest of everything, then sure, go and<br>upgrade. But Ubuntu LTS is an excellent choice for users wanting a
<br>stable system that they don't need to upgrade for a few years.<br><br>--<br>Jethro Carr<br><br><a href="http://www.jethrocarr.com">www.jethrocarr.com</a><br><a href="http://www.jethrocarr.com/index.php?cms=blog">www.jethrocarr.com/index.php?cms=blog
</a><br><br><br><br>--<br>Wellington Linux Users Group Mailing List: <a href="mailto:wellylug@lists.wellylug.org.nz">wellylug@lists.wellylug.org.nz</a><br>To Leave: <a href="http://lists.wellylug.org.nz/mailman/listinfo/wellylug">
http://lists.wellylug.org.nz/mailman/listinfo/wellylug</a><br><br><br></blockquote></div><br>