[aklug] Re: Natty Issues

* Joshua J. Kugler <joshua@eeinternet.com> [110502 16:07]:
> On Monday 02 May 2011, Bruce Hill elucidated thus:
> > Seriously, it's pretty arrogant when someone refers to their distro's
> > release name and expect you to know what they're talking about. And
> > how many Linux distros are there now? And how many different release
> > names would that make?
>
> Possibly, but according to Distro Watch:
>
> 1 Ubuntu 2229
> 2 Mint 1966
> 3 Fedora 1487
> 4 Debian 1414
> 5 openSUSE 1294
> 6 Arch 916
> 7 Sabayon 843
> 8 PCLinuxOS 839
> 9 Puppy 804
> 10 CentOS 748
> 11 Mandriva 710
> 12 Slackware 665
> 13 Ultimate 579
> 14 Chakra 569
> 15 FreeBSD 514
>
> I could probably know what someone was talking about *most* of the time
> if someone mentioned a release name from that list. I work daily in
> Ubuntu, Debian, CentOS, and RHEL, so that may contribute to it. But if
> you've been in the Linux world for 10+ years (and most people here have
> way more than that), you probably keep up with names and releases, even
> if you don't use them (e.g. I don't have any Fedora boxes).
>
> > Anyway, perhaps someone will fix borken Ubuntu ... and when he fixes
> > his problem or updates a package Ubuntu will do like Windoze ...
> > REBOOT!
>
> Only time Ubuntu's updater asks for a reboot is when a kernel gets
> swapped out. Maybe when you upgrade libc...don't remember on that.
> Don't remember the message when you upgrade X.

  I've been using Linux for 15 years now. As my primary workstation
  and development platform for 11 years. I've used Slack, Slax,
  Redhat, CentOS, Fedora, ubuntu, mandrake (back in the day)
  kubuntu, and mint. As a workstation, I couldn't be happier with
  ubuntu 10.04 (LTS) it is rock-solid stable and *is* linux to the
  core - at least for my purposes at the command line. I have found
  the previous versions of ubuntu and kubuntu were far less stable.

  And I think apt is a thing of beauty.
  But here are my caveats:
  0)I find the frequent updating irritating - but it may be a
  'hardening' process that will prove successful - I'll give
  Canonical the benefit of the doubt.

  1)I would *never* (at this stage anyway) use ubuntu as a server,
  my ubuntu workstations are closed to the outside world. I don't
  have to fear that an update might open a security hole. If a
  customer insisted on my building an ubuntu server for him/her, I'd
  refuse.

  2)When it comes to custom building, I have in the past found that
  slackware or slax have more up-to-date build tools.
  
  Also, I believe that I have benefited from Ubuntu in that it has
  increased the membership in the linux community. It is possible
  that those of you who have no liking for ubuntu might have similar
  benefits, as the number of linux users increase.

  My business partner has used linux since the very first. He would
  very vigorously agree with what I have said here. He now uses
  ubuntu almost exclusively for development.

-- 
Tim 
tim at johnsons-web dot com or akwebsoft dot com
http://www.akwebsoft.com
---------
To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.