[ale] Spam: Re: LTS doesn't always mean LTS
DJ-Pfulio
DJPfulio at jdpfu.com
Tue Apr 26 11:37:50 EDT 2016
I didn't enable "Universe" on server installs. It is enabled
automatically, it seems, by Canonical. I do use ansible and install both
rdiff-backup and mailx automatically (along with 20+ other pkgs) on
every box for 14.04.
http://blog.jdpfu.com/2014/02/28/1st-five-minutes-on-a-server explains.
And just to be clear, "supported" to me means getting non-disruptive
package updates, especially security updates, as part of easily managed
weekly patching efforts. I avoid installing outside the package
management system to limit which things fall outside that simple
management. I avoid direct .deb file installs too, for the same reason
AND to avoid APT-hell.
Outdated may not actually be outdated, just like "Unsupported" really
means "Unsupported by Canonical" ...
Nobody thinks Canonical is doing anything wrong or even anything they
didn't tell us. But some of us are still being surprised, so maybe there
is something more that could be done? Making me manually add and
non-LTS repositories to an LTS server config wouldn't be bad. Or asking
how long I needed the system to be supported during the installation and
setting the default APT sources based on the answer?
The rdiff-backup package in "supported debian" is the same version as
provided by 14.04. Is there any real risk? Probably not. At least not
for that project. What about nginx? I use the nginx PPA from that
project to stay more current on high-risk services. For an email
gateway box, I just switched from Ubuntu Server to Debian Wheezy, by
coincidence. No other reason.
Being "supported" is a major consideration for me. If many of the pkgs
that I use (and I'm not a pkg whore) are not, moving to another distro
is the easiest solution. Of course, then the question becomes whether
"supported" really means anything on the other distros too. Cannot say
today. On RHEL - adding epel ... does that break the same stuff?
BTW, someone has posted that some pkgs are listed unsupported after a
fresh 16.04 install - the ubuntu forums are discussing this now.
On 04/25/16 16:57, David Tomaschik wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 8:59 AM, DJ-Pfulio <DJPfulio at jdpfu.com
> <mailto:DJPfulio at jdpfu.com>> wrote:
>
> Just to clarify - chromium-browser is NOT chrome-browser.
> I would **NEVER** load chrome-browser.
> That's worse than running Win10, IMHO.
>
> I run Ubuntu mainly because of my misbelief that core repositories were
> supported for 5 yrs. I have to rethink that choice.
>
>
> Which packages in *main* are not supported for 5 years? I've spot
> checked a few of the ones you've listed, and they all seem to be in
> universe. Canonical doesn't guarantee *any* package in universe will
> get security updates, not even 5 minutes after they release. While they
> *might* update some of them, and some of the packages may be maintained
> by Canonical employees, they're all considered "community maintained"
> which means Canonical doesn't guarantee any updates -- stability,
> security, or otherwise. (Basically the same as "contrib" on Debian.)
>
>
>
> On my desktop ... the fact that LTS-to-LTS packages aren't supported is
> very concerning. I'm not a repo-whore; don't add "universe" on servers.
> Checking all my servers for similar issues now.
>
> Audio, video, language processing and printer drivers are the main
> things not supported. fail2ban! mailx! Ouch.
>
> On my mail server ... it isn't as bad.
> You have 6 packages (0.9%) supported until February 2015 (9m)
> libgnutls13 fail2ban rdiff-backup are the scary ones.
>
>
> You claim you don't enable universe on servers, but these are Universe
> packages:
> - http://packages.ubuntu.com/trusty/fail2ban
> - http://packages.ubuntu.com/trusty/rdiff-backup
> - http://packages.ubuntu.com/trusty/heirloom-mailx
> - libgnutls13 isn't even listed on packages.ubuntu.com
> <http://packages.ubuntu.com>?
>
>
>
> rdiff-backup is unsupported?!!!!!!!! Didn't see that in the other lists
> (but looking at 6 packages does make things easier to see compared
> to 200+).
>
> What is the equiv cmd on debian? Brought up a new debian wheezy server
> for front-end email stuff 2 weeks ago. Appears there aren't any
> unsupported packages on it, including rdiff-backup.
>
>
> I'm not sure, Debian LTS is a volunteer effort that's not considered an
> official Debian project. Debian stable gets updates to "main" until
> about 1-2 years after the next stable release (during which it is
> considered "oldstable"): https://wiki.debian.org/DebianReleases
>
>
>
> Ok - both Debian and Ubuntu 14.04 are running rdiff-backup 1.2.8.
> Supported on Debian, but not supported on 14.04? Hummmm. Check the
> actual pkg installed - both are at 1.2.8-7. So this is the classic 10%
> patching vs 90% correct reporting issue. Reporting outdated packages
> correctly is MORE IMPORTANT than just saying they aren't supported.
> Don't know which is failing - debian or ubuntu at this point.
>
>
> You've listed commands for finding when things are not supported, not
> when they are outdated. You can check outdated against your repo via
> apt or similar, but you can't check outdated against upstream easily.
> (Maybe this should be possible, but then you'd need a standard format
> for the upstream to report their current version, and it gets messy fast.)
>
>
>
> Sorry for sharing what probably isn't that important to many folks here.
>
> On 04/25/16 10:31, Jim Lynch wrote:
> > However if you are a school in GA that wants to run Linux and plans on
> > doing the mandatory testing, you're going to have to install Ubuntu.
> >
> > See
> >
> https://www.gadoe.org/Curriculum-Instruction-and-Assessment/Assessment/Documents/Milestones/GA%20Milestones%20DRC%20INSIGHT%20Tech%20Requirments%20To%20Post%208.3.15.pdf
> >
> > Another document that I saw suggested Fedora 20 was OK too, but
> that has
> > even worse support EOL was June, 2015.
> >
> > The problem with running just any old distro is that if it doesn't
> work
> > you are in deep dodo.
> >
> > While I don't think the distro has a lot to do with successful testing
> > via a Chrome browser, if it doesn't work and you're using Ubuntu, you
> > won't be blamed for it.
> >
> > Jim.
> >
> > On 04/25/2016 09:40 AM, Jim Kinney wrote:
> >>
> >> Ouch! That doesn't sound supported at all.
> >>
> >> Another in a growing list of why I don't use or recommend Ubuntu.
> >>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org <mailto:Ale at ale.org>
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>
>
>
>
> --
> David Tomaschik
> OpenPGP: 0x5DEA789B
> https://systemoverlord.com
> david at systemoverlord.com <mailto:david at systemoverlord.com>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>
--
Got Linux? Used on smartphones, tablets, desktop computers, media
centers, and servers by kids, Moms, Dads, grandparents and IT
professionals.
More information about the Ale
mailing list