Anyone Here just stick with the LTS?

[hockeyfighter09]

I was wondering if there is anyone here who used Dapper Drake up until Hardy Heron came out? I was thinking about doing this with Heron until the next LTS came along. What are the benefits? Also I was wondering about the program updates. Do they occasionally release program updates to get it relatively up to date or is it like Debian Stable where the programs go out of date quickly? Thanks in advance to all the replies!

[billgoldberg]

I always install the newest version available.

I guess the main reason to stick with an LTS is that it's going to be rock solid compared to the newest releases.

[Ghil]

quite the contrary, I just hop on the beta wagon as soon as it's possible. But If I needed a stable system absolutely, I would stick with LTSes...but apart from stability, I don't know if there are real benefits to it?

[maniacmusician]

Keeping an LTS system is really easy if you steer clear of announcements about new versions, etc, and simply use your OS. However, if you're someone who keeps up with news about Linux and Ubuntu, I think you'll find it very hard to stick to an LTS release, and being stuck with old versions of everything. It's really quite gut-wrenching to see everyone drooling over new features that you don't have because you stuck with the LTS.

I generally find the releases inbetween LTS's to be stable enough for daily use, so I have no need to stick with them. I like to have updated applications, that can deal with new formats, and have more functionability. For example, OO.org 3 will have full support for OOXML formats, and while I would never use them myself (odf for me), I often have to deal with them, so I would need features like that. I also want to be able to switch to KDE4 once I feel it's ready enough for me.

Basically, as a geek, I find it hard to live with an unchanging, static system for so long. If you're anywhere near as geeky as me, you probably won't enjoy it either.

[igknighted]

If I needed a rock solid, stable system then I would use Debian, SLES/D or RHEL/CentOS instead of Ubuntu. Since I would rather have (close to) the latest version of an application, the LTS thing does nothing for me.

[cardinals_fan]

I used Edgy until a few weeks ago...

[danbuter]

I'm thinking of sticking with Hardy, mainly because for the first time everything actually works on my laptop the way it is supposed to. Other than the .1 release in July, I think Hardy users will be "stuck" with whatever version of each program they have, and not get updates, unless you do it manually.

[K.Mandla]

My parents use Dapper still, mostly because everything works and there's no demand for newer flashier programs. I'm not sure if they'll upgrade or not; I'll see if I can talk them into it.

[urukrama]

I still run Dapper on my main machine (though I also have Gutsy on another computer). I never saw the need to upgrade. Everything works fine, it is stable, and if I want a newer version than that in the repos, I don't mind compiling from source. Updating every six months is a bit too much for my tastes.

Things go out of date, though. The updates the repos provide are security updates and the like. Firefox, for example, is not updated to 2 (what to speak of 3). If these things bother you, don't stick with a LTS.

I think the appeal to LTS is much greater in corporate environments or less experienced Linux users who just want to read some emails and write a few papers.

[hockeyfighter09]

Thanks for all the replie! Lets say if I activate backports in the repositories would that provide me with more updated packages without messing with stability?

[urukrama]

Yes, but the Backports repos aren't very big. You won't get updates for everything you may want in there.

[jaytek13]

I don't really see a reason to. The LTS releases aren't necessarily any more stable or secure than the non-LTS releases. They are more targeted towards business who don't want to roll out a new OS every six months just to have the latest and greatest things.

I like the latest and greatest things... well, most of the time.

[diskotek]

i'm just upgrading because i like to spend time with my linux box.

since i'm rolling with ubuntu i have a seprate /home directory to upgrade/re-install safely.

yeah, newest things always looks charming also, who can resist new theme or new programmes, if you are spending (at least) 15 minutes on forum everyday

[chucky chuckaluck]

had i not been interested in arch, i would have just stuck to gutsy, as i was pretty content with it.

[Billy Infinity]

I've been using Dapper since 6.06.1 came out and will upgrade to Hardy sometime in the summer when an 8.04.1 ISO (with FF3 Final) is released.

I've tried Edgy, Feisty, Gutsy on my now 3-year-old laptop... they are all fantastic, but there would always be a couple of problems here and there, problems almost always unique to each version for me. Dapper has given me no headaches whatsoever.

LTS makes me happy. So I'm happy with waiting around for the next LTS after Hardy. I mean, I love the fact that Ubuntu follows a predictable release schedule (wish I could say the same for some other distros), but 6 months is a little too often for me to upgrade.

That's just me. Your mileage (as you can already see with the diversity of answers to your question) may most certainly vary. ;)

- Billy -

[Guitar John]

I have considered it. I've done clean installs on every version rather than dist-upgrade. I just like starting with a clean slate.

But if I have to look at that "New distribution release is available" button on the Update Manager for the next 3 years, that would kind of suck.

We'll see.

[urk_nono]

I'm sticking with Hardy, unless I break it like all the other distros :KS

[koenn]

I'm still using 6.06 and planning to upgrade when the next LTS is released.
I prefer a computer that works and woulmdn't like having to fix something every 6 months just to get to my email, the internet, or my files. The geek in me likes to fix things and mess with computers, but I prefer to do that on interesting projects of my own chosing, rather than on a failed upgrade or a regression bug.

Maybe I'm overlooking something, but there appears that there to be something not quite right in Ubuntu's release cycle. If you didn't upgrade from Dapper to Edgy, you have no choice than to wait 'till the next LTS release - they only way I could have gotten, say, Gutsy, would have been to either update to all in-between releases, or do a clean install. And I don't consider a clean install a valid upgrade path - mainly because it would force you to track all your customizations that have an impact outside /home, and re-do them.


That's the other thing that's weird about ubuntu : a clean install seems to be, at least on ubuntuforums, the preferred way of "upgrading" - while Debian effortlessly spans years between major releases and still lets you succesfully upgrade from one release to another with nothing but apt-get upgrade and dist-upgrade.

But anyway, I track LTS for now, mainly because I consider a computer and its OS a tool and find that there are more interesting things to do on a computer than upgrading operating systems (and fix breakage caused by those upgrades). I also would like to see if Ubuntu is able of actually upgrading from one LTS release to the next.

[HappyFeet]

And I don't consider a clean install a valid upgrade path - mainly because it would force you to track all your customizations that have an impact outside /home, and re-do them.



and how long would that take? a WHOLE hour and a half? OMG! NO! PLEASE DONT MAKE ME DO THAT! i would rather die than spend time re-configuring. even though i spend hours wasting time watching tv and movies and other non-events in my life. but to to spend time re-configuring is absolutely UNTHINKABLE!

sarcasm over. seriously, is it that much of a burden timewise to spend a couple hours every 6 months? if it is, how do you find time to even use your computer? get real. maybe you should have stayed with win95. that way you would have had 13yrs of familiarity, and and gotten a few hours of your life back.

[koenn]

and how long would that take? a WHOLE hour and a half? OMG! NO! PLEASE DONT MAKE ME DO THAT! i would rather die than spend time re-configuring. even though i spend hours wasting time watching tv and movies and other non-events in my life. but to to spend time re-configuring is absolutely UNTHINKABLE!

sarcasm over. seriously, is it that much of a burden timewise to spend a couple hours every 6 months? if it is, how do you find time to even use your computer? get real. maybe you should have stayed with win95. that way you would have had 13yrs of familiarity, and and gotten a few hours of your life back.

And just who are you judge my priorities ? Your post stinks of prejudice and wrong assumptions, and apparently you did not understand even half of what I wrote, so I'm not going to waste my time explaining, let alone defending my position.

It looks as if you identify with an operating system, a machine really, so much that you can't stand to see anything less than blind adoration for it. You have a problem. I think you need to seek psychological help.

[gn2]

I intend sticking with 8.04 till the next LTS release.

[akiratheoni]

and how long would that take? a WHOLE hour and a half? OMG! NO! PLEASE DONT MAKE ME DO THAT! i would rather die than spend time re-configuring. even though i spend hours wasting time watching tv and movies and other non-events in my life. but to to spend time re-configuring is absolutely UNTHINKABLE!

sarcasm over. seriously, is it that much of a burden timewise to spend a couple hours every 6 months? if it is, how do you find time to even use your computer? get real. maybe you should have stayed with win95. that way you would have had 13yrs of familiarity, and and gotten a few hours of your life back.

I don't have an issue with reinstalling programs and reconfiguring things but c'mon, that post is kinda mean, it's not needed...

[retrow]

My laptop from 2004 won't survive until 2011, so when I buy my new laptop I'll install whichever is the latest and greatest GNU/Linux distro is out at that time.

My older desktop from 2003 can live with 8.04 LTS until it dies, while my new desktop will get the latest distro upgrade each time a new one comes out.

[Don S]

But if I have to look at that "New distribution release is available" button on the Update Manager for the next 3 years, that would kind of suck.


You know, you can turn that off in: Software Sources -> Updates.

Anyway, I like to stick to a somewhat stable, but up-to-date system. I'm an update fanatic. If you asked me, every piece of software should be updated with new stable features daily -- or at least weekly.

Alas, I can wait 6 months for a new OS upgrade. If I want an update to my other software, I find the .deb's or compile it.

[hockeyfighter09]

But anyway, I track LTS for now, mainly because I consider a computer and its OS a tool and find that there are more interesting things to do on a computer than upgrading operating systems (and fix breakage caused by those upgrades). I also would like to see if Ubuntu is able of actually upgrading from one LTS release to the next.

There is, I found an option in Hardy that lets you choose if you want it to notify you if a regular release is availble or only LTS release availble. So that also answers another question in this thread, You wouldnt have to stare at the update button for a new release for the next three years if you just choose to notify you of only the LTS releases. :guitar:

[cookieofdoom]

I got on the Ubuntu train just after Edgy was released. I guess I'm kinda reckless or something 'cause I instinctively went after the latest and greatest and have been doing so ever since. I don't plan on sticking with Hardy for my main OS. When 8.10 comes out I'll probably switch to it.

I got a computer setup for my mom, though, and I'll probably upgrade her to Hardy and keep her on it unless there's a really big need to go to something else (which I don't see coming at this point). Same with the computer I'm building for my grandparents. 5 years of security/stability updates without having to worry about your entire workstation changing (new interface, menu, etc.) is worth something to them. As for me? I like shiny buttons, even if they make things go boom and not work anymore.

[koenn]

There is, I found an option in Hardy that lets you choose if you want it to notify you if a regular release is availble or only LTS release availble.
With or without that option, Hardy is only the 2nd LTS release so far, so while the documentation says that Ubuntu will support LTS-to-LTS upgrades, noone has actually seen it happen yet. On the other hand, quite a few people have seen things go wrong during 6-monthly upgrades. What I meant is : I'd like to see if an upgrade from Dapper to Hardy LTS actually works .

Part of my motivation is the fact that I'd like see whether Ubuntu would be an acceptible solution in a business environment. I'f you're maintaining 120 desktops, you dont want to upgrade and fix or reinstall and reconfigure every 6 months, definitely not if your main focus is maintaining servers and networks. And I take the same approach to my home computers.

[urk_nono]

I guess I'm not the only one who goes "OOOH!" when a new update is available :KS

[Darkhack]

I have two partitions on my hard drive. I installed Hardy on the partition I use for stable software. The other partition I use for distro testing and any experimental stuff. I'll probably upgrade to regular releases on my testing partition, but stick with Hardy on my stable partition. I do this because I can't wait two years for the next release. There is almost always something I really want. However I keep the stable partition in case I break something when I'm playing around in Linux and I realize, "oh fiddle sticks. I have a 10 page paper due tomorrow". Also sometimes there are just regressions. I know a lot of people have already had problems with 8.04 not working with hardware that was just fine in 7.10. Version 8.04 works just fine on my computer and everything is smooth and peachy. I don't want to sacrifice that if I have a paper due or something critical like that.

[Guitar John]

You know, you can turn that off in: Software Sources -> Updates.



I'll be darned. It's set to LTS Releases by default. Thanks for pointing that out.

Cheers,
John

[defenestratos]

I stayed with 6.06 LTS and attempted the upgrade to 8.04 hopping a couple of releases. Totally buggered up my system and I was forced to do a clean install... Lucky I had the partitioned /home directory...Not!! I'm not angry thought because I got like nearly two years of glory out of the last LTS release and I look forward to that with Hardy. It was just so rock stable towards the end there. I didn't turn my computer off for months.
HARDY IS EVERYTHING I DREAMED OF!!!