17.10 is already here...

[Chanath]

I was thinking of getting rid of the "development branch" in my 17.10 installs for sometime. I wasn't going to dist-upgrade any of my installs anyway, only just upgrade them to the newer state. So, all the distros, Unity, Xubuntu, Gnome and Kubuntu are already 17.10. I don't think "sudo do-release-upgrade -d" would do anything anyway, most probably just change the name. Well, the name is changed.

[Frogs Hair]

This is what I got.

[Chanath]

This is what I got.

Of course, that's what you get, when you look in that way, or look at the grub screen, if you are dual booting with other Linuxes or Windows -- Ubuntu Artful Aardvark (development branch) --whatever Ubuntu derivative you are using.

But, do you see something called "development branch" in the sources.list?

(I'll explain my thinking sometime later, for I am at work now. Its 8.58am here, but the time edited shows Last edited by Chanath; 4 Minutes Ago at 12:58 PM. I think something wrong with forum timing.)

[ventrical]

Of course, that's what you get, when you look in that way, or look at the grub screen, if you are dual booting with other Linuxes or Windows -- Ubuntu Artful Aardvark (development branch) --whatever Ubuntu derivative you are using.

But, do you see something called "development branch" in the sources.list?

(I'll explain my thinking sometime later, for I am at work now. Its 8.58am here, but the time edited shows Last edited by Chanath; 4 Minutes Ago at 12:58 PM. I think something wrong with forum timing.)

If you guys have time I would like for you to test the release candidate (full download) and do some hard installs. Otherwise I will do it. I have 8 machines to test with .

Regards..

[Chanath]

If you guys have time I would like for you to test the release candidate (full download) and do some hard installs.

That's what I am trying to say - there is no need for any special downloads and installs. The first install at first mention of the next development cycle is enough. And then, just update and upgrade regularly. All the pluses and minuses of the given DE devs and base devs would come through.

Or just upgrade to the next development cycle, just as Ubuntu mentions that and go on updating and upgrading.

[Chanath]

Ok, here's what I think.

When the next development iso is released, the stable repo is moved to the new repo, for example, when 17.10 development was announced, the 17.04 repos was moved to the new artful repo and renamed artful. At that time, the login screen etc showed 17.04, and after few months, it changed to 17.10. When we downloaded 17.10 daily, whatever the derivative, it showed it is artful-desktop-amd64.iso, and after installation the installed distro shows Ubuntu Artful Aardvark (development branch). Then when the 17.10 final is released, and you do sudo do-release-upgrade -d or use the software updater, after certain waiting time, you get rid of the "(development branch)" part of the name and get the feeling that you have the new distro is installed. But,...

But, while we were using the "development" 17.10, the updates always came from the artful repo, not from some "development" repo. Whatever changes done by the base devs or given DE devs would also come from the artful repo. So, if you could successfully change the zesty repo to artful repo at the beginning or later and keep on updating and upgrading, what you have at the end of the "development" cycle is what you'd get, if you'd download the final release. Or, even more up to date install.

Until the development cycle is on, you get that Ubuntu Artful Aardvark (development branch) in your grub menu. That's what you see if you look in /etc/lsb-release, /etc/issue, etc/issue.net, /usr/lib/os-release. In my installs, apt sees the artful repo, rather than the devel repo.

In a way, Ubuntu is a rolling distro, periodically having a temporary stop in every 9 months. The Ubuntu base packages are based on Debian Sid/Testing, only packaged somewhat differently than Debian. The DE devs have to match the changing of packages and keep that rolling all the time.

Like I said at the beginning, this is what I think and that's what I did. For some time, I don't have the devel repos, only artful repos. All 17.10 installs work without a hiccup.

[Frogs Hair]

But, do you see something called "development branch" in the sources.list?

No, but that's a change in the source list name and nothing more. As of yesterday there were entirely new packages still being installed, not just upgrades. The release ID in the terminal changes right at the end.

[Chanath]

No, but that's a change in the source list name and nothing more. As of yesterday there were entirely new packages still being installed, not just upgrades. The release ID in the terminal changes right at the end.

That's correct. The new packages and the upgrades come from the artful repos. I'm experimenting, so let's see if the installs live on.

[ventrical]

That's what I am trying to say - there is no need for any special downloads and installs. The first install at first mention of the next development cycle is enough. And then, just update and upgrade regularly. All the pluses and minuses of the given DE devs and base devs would come through.

Or just upgrade to the next development cycle, just as Ubuntu mentions that and go on updating and upgrading.

Yes.. I already read you on this .. but is not what I am talking about. I am talking about the daily release from: http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/daily-live/current/ so that we can test the ISO. specifically.

Regards..

[ventrical]

Ok, here's what I think.

When the next development iso is released, the stable repo is moved to the new repo, for example, when 17.10 development was announced, the 17.04 repos was moved to the new artful repo and renamed artful. At that time, the login screen etc showed 17.04, and after few months, it changed to 17.10. When we downloaded 17.10 daily, whatever the derivative, it showed it is artful-desktop-amd64.iso, and after installation the installed distro shows Ubuntu Artful Aardvark (development branch). Then when the 17.10 final is released, and you do sudo do-release-upgrade -d or use the software updater, after certain waiting time, you get rid of the "(development branch)" part of the name and get the feeling that you have the new distro is installed. But,...

But, while we were using the "development" 17.10, the updates always came from the artful repo, not from some "development" repo. Whatever changes done by the base devs or given DE devs would also come from the artful repo. So, if you could successfully change the zesty repo to artful repo at the beginning or later and keep on updating and upgrading, what you have at the end of the "development" cycle is what you'd get, if you'd download the final release. Or, even more up to date install.

Until the development cycle is on, you get that Ubuntu Artful Aardvark (development branch) in your grub menu. That's what you see if you look in /etc/lsb-release, /etc/issue, etc/issue.net, /usr/lib/os-release. In my installs, apt sees the artful repo, rather than the devel repo.

In a way, Ubuntu is a rolling distro, periodically having a temporary stop in every 9 months. The Ubuntu base packages are based on Debian Sid/Testing, only packaged somewhat differently than Debian. The DE devs have to match the changing of packages and keep that rolling all the time.

Like I said at the beginning, this is what I think and that's what I did. For some time, I don't have the devel repos, only artful repos. All 17.10 installs work without a hiccup.

Yes .. thats the ubuntu.info file in concert with the sources.list. As I said, I am talking about testing the ISO release candidate, not: https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread....3#post11893873


Regards..