Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Mark Shuttleworth Proposes Delaying next Ubuntu

Posted by Zonk on Sat Mar 11, 2006 04:41 PM
from the waiting-on-the-duck dept.
Beuno writes "Mark Shuttleworth has proposed on the ubuntu-art mailing list to postpone the 'Dapper Drake' release by 6 weeks. He lays out the reasons pretty clearly: the delay should make the release a more user-friendly distro. He has also called up a community meeting in April 14th on IRC for community input. Is it really worth delaying the release for more then a month just to polish it out a little bit?" Commentary on this also available from the Tectonic site.

Related Stories

[+] IT: Dapper Drake Hits Ubuntu Servers 259 comments
linuxbeta writes "Ubuntu 6.04 (Dapper Drake) daily builds have hit the Ubuntu servers. Dapper's goals: Substantial polish and integration, software discovery and installation, make network-wide enterprise updates easy to manage, consider LSB and related certification standards and support for deployment of Dapper on mission-critical servers. Screenshots have already surfaced."
[+] Shuttleworth on Open Source Development 162 comments
An anonymous reader writes "Mark Shuttleworth (retired cosmonaut and Ubuntu daddy) has written an informative blog entry about the problems associated with open source development. He found that paying geeks to code without assigning them managers lead to "shiny geek toys", rather than the product he was actually paying for. Shuttleworth says that left-field thinking is required when it comes to managing open source teams. See also Andrew Orlowski's analysis of why AOL eventually killed the Netscape project from a few years ago, where he describes Mozilla developers as "wandering off into Lotus-eating land"."
[+] Previewing Dapper And Edgy 144 comments
Frank Clarkson writes to mention a ZDNet article about the upcoming release of 'Dapper Drake', Ubuntu Linux. They also give a mini-preview of Eft. From the article: "'I'm promising to impose (almost ;-) ) zero from-the-top requirements for Edgy, this release is entirely up the to development team to envision and implement,' he wrote. 'Almost everything that lands in Edgy will be driven from the development team, who get to play with whatever new technologies they fancy along the way. So that should give us a nice big bump in infrastructure and bling.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • Error (Score:5, Informative)

    by Doytch (950946) <markpd@g m a i l .com> on Saturday March 11 2006, @04:43PM (#14899522)
    He proposes a town hall for March 14, not April.
  • Well, looking at Vista (Score:4, Insightful)

    by tlacuache (768218) on Saturday March 11 2006, @04:44PM (#14899526)
    How long exactly has Longhorn, er, Vista been pushed off? Six weeks pales in comparison.
  • Question? Answer. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ImaNihilist (889325) on Saturday March 11 2006, @04:44PM (#14899527)
    Is it really worth delaying the release for more then a month just to polish it out a little bit?

    Absolutely.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 11 2006, @04:46PM (#14899529)
    What can be done with Ubuntu that I can't do with Debian?
  • The testers seem to agree (Score:5, Informative)

    by dtfinch (661405) * on Saturday March 11 2006, @04:46PM (#14899532)
    (Last Journal: Monday September 25 2006, @01:19PM)
    505 users in favor of the delay, 50 against at last count.

    http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=142536 [ubuntuforums.org]

    Dapper is coming along nicely, but there are a number of bugs that might not get the attention they deserve if Dapper is released on schedule.

    Their Flight 5 CD is out. It should be quite stable for normal use.

  • "Linux for human beings" (Score:5, Informative)

    by theurge14 (820596) * on Saturday March 11 2006, @04:49PM (#14899540)
    As a Gentoo user, I tried out Ubuntu on an old Toshiba laptop about a month or three ago when the current version came out. I liked what a I saw, but I ran into to huge problems. One, Ubuntu completely screwed up the monitor settings for the laptop, and the sound was completely futzed. I found the solution to fixing the monitor settings on an Ubuntu user forum (involved hand editing X.org's conf file) and the sound, well, I managed to get it to play somewhat but GNOME still never detected it properly.

    If Ubuntu wants to be "Linux for human beings" it needs all the polish it can get after that experience.

    Keep up the good work guys.
  • Well... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Jugalator (259273) on Saturday March 11 2006, @04:49PM (#14899542)
    (Last Journal: Monday February 13 2006, @07:11PM)
    A 6 week delay doesn't sound earth shattering to me... I fail to see the problem here, to be honest. Especially if it's about improving usability, an area critical for Linux adoption, which is one of the main purposes for this particular distro.

    To me, this feels basically like delaying an extra security heavy distro 6 weeks to implement verify a new security protocol implementation works correctly.
    • Re:Well... by MadJo (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @05:52PM
    • Re:Well... by robgamble (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @06:12PM
  • Support/enterprise (Score:5, Insightful)

    by slavemowgli (585321) on Saturday March 11 2006, @04:51PM (#14899550)
    (http://venganza.org/)
    Considering that they want this to be the first Ubuntu release that's supported for a long time and that can compete with things like SuSE's or RedHat's enterprise distributions, I'd say six weeks are perfectly acceptable.
  • by petteri_666 (745343) on Saturday March 11 2006, @04:51PM (#14899553)
    OMG, Ubuntu is closing on Debian.
  • Really... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Clazzy (958719) on Saturday March 11 2006, @04:52PM (#14899559)
    (http://www.savagewar.co.uk/)
    To be honest, Dapper is very stable and polished already. There's mixed reactions over the new Clearlooks scheme they've implemented but overall, it's turning out very well. I can't speak for the localisation issues, but a stable release is much better than a rushed release. If you want to try Dapper, Flight 5 should be just fine.
    • Re:Really... by Goalie_Ca (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @05:16PM
    • Re:Really... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by arrrrg (902404) on Saturday March 11 2006, @10:05PM (#14900773)
      There are certain things that simply do not work on Dapper at the moment. Most important for me, I haven't found a single Lisp compiler that works. CLisp, CMUCL, and SBCL all worked fine on breezy; as soon as I upgraded to dapper, they started segfaulting on startup... I know very little about the internals of Linux, but I think its something to do with changes in the memory model that are messing with the garbage collectors.
      [ Parent ]
  • d'uh. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Yahweh Doesn't Exist (906833) on Saturday March 11 2006, @04:52PM (#14899560)
    >Is it really worth delaying the release for more then a month just to polish it out a little bit?

    there are hundreds of distros already, and the only thing they all lack is polish, so yes.

    what's the hurry?
    • Re:d'uh. by ClamIAm (Score:1) Sunday March 12 2006, @02:28AM
    • Re:d'uh. by gentooligan (Score:1) Sunday March 12 2006, @03:06AM
    • Re:d'uh. by thedletterman (Score:1) Sunday March 12 2006, @04:17AM
  • YES! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by geddes (533463) on Saturday March 11 2006, @04:54PM (#14899566)
    One of the reasons, imho, that Blizzard's games are always so good, is that they are not afraid to delay them. They test and test and tweak and tweak and when they game comes out, it is of the highest quality. Blizzard is admirable because they respect that programming is an art that can't be rushed. Most companies rush their products so they can start generating revenue.

    Patience is a virtue. Ubuntu has no need to generate revenue, and if it takes six more weeks to make the release more usable for human beings, that can only be a good thing.

    • Re:YES! by Lifyre (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @08:26PM
      • Re:YES! by danielk1982 (Score:1) Sunday March 12 2006, @01:01PM
    • Re:YES! by Dunbal (Score:3) Saturday March 11 2006, @05:09PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Real reason for the delay... by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @04:54PM
  • Out of sync (Score:4, Insightful)

    by miscz (888242) on Saturday March 11 2006, @04:56PM (#14899574)
    (http://www.miscz.pl/)
    If it wasn't for the fact that Ubuntu is synchronized with Gnome releases I wouldn't mind the delay. But now they would have to either rush the next release, be late with it or completly skip Gnome 2.16. I hope they'll find some good solution because many users are preferring Ubuntu to other distros because of fairly nice bleeding-edgeness. With this step they could lose major selling point to causal Linux geeks.

    The recent theme changes are not a step in good direction too. It looks abysymal and burns my eyes. Even tough I didn't like brown theme the new one made me miss it.
  • Absolutely it's OK! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by NorbrookC (674063) on Saturday March 11 2006, @04:57PM (#14899581)

    Is it really worth delaying the release for more then a month just to polish it out a little bit?"

    Yes, it's worth it. FTA, this isn't a release aimed at the "average Linux user." It's meant for enterprises, and it's important to get it right. It's something that can be a big point for the adoption of Linux in the desktop workspace, that this is a distro which looks good, has a wide range of language options, and has support. Spending a rather trivial amount of time getting it fully ready is what should be done, rather than try to hit an arbitrary "release date", only to, a few weeks later, do the MS routine of "here's the update package, Service Pack X".

  • Not just polish... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BaltikaTroika (809862) on Saturday March 11 2006, @05:00PM (#14899587)
    I think that almost everybody would agree that a little more time spent making a product better is a good thing.

    It's not just about polish, though. TFA lays out a number of points where improvements are needed:

    1. Testing
    2. Certification
    3. Localisation
    4. (last but not least) Polish

    Improvements to Asian localisation should help a ton of people - we're not all English speakers. :) Any steps, no matter how small, to appeal to the Chinese/Korean/Japanese markets will probably pay off well.

    Not that it all matters to me, though... I use SUSE. :)

    BaltikaTroika
  • Software delay? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by nurb432 (527695) on Saturday March 11 2006, @05:02PM (#14899594)
    (http://slashdot.org/~nurb432/ | Last Journal: Friday August 27 2004, @03:24PM)
    Its not like this isnt common practice in the first place.. "sorry its not quite done' is a good answer..
  • Why the personality injection? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @05:03PM
  • It's worth delaying (Score:4, Insightful)

    by babbling (952366) on Saturday March 11 2006, @05:14PM (#14899659)
    (http://www.getogg.org/)
    This is the Ubuntu that will be competing with Windows Vista. It needs to be polished.

    There is going to be a reasonably large number of desktop users willing to "try Linux out" just before they "upgrade" to Vista. The distribution they're most likely to try is currently Ubuntu, and if it is good enough, they might switch to Linux rather than Vista.
  • worth delaying for WPA support alone by keithy (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @05:32PM
  • What if 6.04 (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Ethan Allison (904983) <slashdot@neonstream.us> on Saturday March 11 2006, @05:40PM (#14899797)
    (http://neonstream.us/)
    Got released in April, but the CDs didn't come out until everything was polished? Maybe a 6.05 edition?
    • Re:What if 6.04 by Richard Dick Head (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @06:16PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • The Flight 5 DL Link by matva (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @05:53PM
  • Release already! by Hackeron (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @05:55PM
  • Compile kernel modules for dapper (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Fafnir_b (558392) on Saturday March 11 2006, @06:04PM (#14899918)
    By the way: does anyone know if dapper will ship a kernel that's been compiled with the version of gcc that's included on the distribution CD's? If badger had one fundamental flaw, it would be a kernel compiled with gcc3.4 and gcc 4.? included on the CD. People who need to compile e.g. their wireless driver because it's not included in the standard kernel, are fucked, because they may not have network access with the distribution files and need to download either gcc 3.4 or kernel sources...
  • Value of Polish vs. New Features (Score:4, Insightful)

    by buckhead_buddy (186384) on Saturday March 11 2006, @06:19PM (#14899998)
    The biggest issue is that not everyone will work on polish and bug fixing. Some will be working on development of new features. A good version control system should allow this state of affairs, but what will happen when someone working on the development branch gets a major new feature developed in the long six week time frame that others are working on the polish?

    One faction will say, "Don't commit any new features until the next major release after this one!" while another faction will say "This is too important to wait through endless patch releases and another major release cycle!" The temptation will be to "just risk a few bugs" for this "major new feature" by those who don't really see the value of the polish right now. The offense will be that "any new feature" will require more polish, patches, or in essence de-values the work the polish team has been doing. Great amounts of spite and venom will be launched at each side.

    Set a firm, clear policy about what the polish window will be and about the firm exclusion of new functionality that's independent of any particular technology before this starts and make sure everyone knows what that policy is. Not setting a policy is bound to cause chaos. Setting and then breaking a policy is bound to drive off any future desire to work on future "polish" release work.
  • Great (Score:3, Interesting)

    I think that's great. Just a while ago Dapper got a new urine-colored Human theme [ubuntuforums.org], and - all due respect to the people who put their efforts into making Ubuntu better - frankly, it's just horrible. If the release is delayed, they have a lot better change to fix the theme.

    Another thing i'd really like to see in dapper is the new NetworkManager 0.6 [gnome.org] with its WPA and OpenVPN goodness. "Automatic network detection and configuration management [launchpad.net]" is high-priority target for dapper, and the new features in n-m 0.6 are needed by many users.

    • Re:Great by MattFlower (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @06:38PM
      • Re:Great by ion_ (Score:3) Saturday March 11 2006, @07:38PM
        • Re:Great by SmartSsa (Score:1) Sunday March 12 2006, @10:45AM
    • Urine?? by dolson (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @11:57PM
    • Re:Great by Anthony Liguori (Score:2) Sunday March 12 2006, @06:05PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • fix slow firefox by towsonu2003 (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @06:31PM
  • Excited about Drake... by biglig2 (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @06:40PM
  • Hell yes Hold the release. by AgNO3 (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @06:57PM
  • Please. PLEASE! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Chris Snook (872473) on Saturday March 11 2006, @06:59PM (#14900174)
    I'm not even an Ubuntu user, but I think the whole community would benefit if some major distro said "Okay, stop everything, we're going to spend six weeks on making the distro usable by normal people." Thanks and Kudos to Ubuntu if they lead the way on this.
  • Polish and stability? by miffo.swe (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @06:59PM
  • Yes (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) on Saturday March 11 2006, @07:00PM (#14900180)
    (http://nojailforpot.com/)
    Is it really worth delaying the release for more then a month just to polish it out a little bit?

    Yes. We're not talking a year, here. A month is inconsequential. The question is silly.

    And, with a distro where being "user-friendly" is a primary feature, it's all the more important to make these minor adjustments in release dates for improvements that are fundamental to the underlying concept.

  • Holy Crap! (Score:3, Funny)

    by HangingChad (677530) on Saturday March 11 2006, @07:09PM (#14900225)
    (http://www.dangercollie.com/music/)
    The stockholders are going to revolt!
  • March 14, not April 14!! by zippity8 (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @07:13PM
  • by happymedium (861907) on Saturday March 11 2006, @07:22PM (#14900277)
    I remember keeping track of the Breezy Badger planning wiki before that version was released, and it seemed to me that the team deferred many of their major goals... on the other hand, it looks like most improvements planned for Dapper have been implemented already, as Shuttleworth notes in his message:

    https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/dapper/+specs [launchpad.net]

    I'll refrain from Debian comparisons, as they're not needed to communicate what stellar work the team has done here. Point is, Ubuntu users and admins ought to support this delay, for the same reason I support Ubuntu... the Ubuntu team simply has its shit together, moreso than that of any other freely available distribution.

    Let Shuttleworth strategize to take on Red Hat, SuSE, and Vista--because Ubuntu actually has a fighting chance. That prospect ought to excite Ubuntu partisans (like me) and fence-sitters alike.
  • by koreth (409849) on Saturday March 11 2006, @07:42PM (#14900340)
    One of Shuttleworth's reasons for the delay is
    After the Asia business tour I realised that we need to improve our support for Chinese, Japanese, Korean and other Asian fonts, translations, input methods and supporting tools.

    Amen to that! I tried installing Ubuntu on my girlfriend's laptop, and in the end I just gave up getting Chinese input working properly (she's Taiwanese and sends a lot of mail in Chinese to her friends back home.) After a couple of long nights spent fiddling with it, I could get it to sort of work with some apps, but this is one area where Windows beats Linux hands down -- after I gave up and installed Windows on her machine, enabling Chinese input took me all of about 30 seconds to do, and it works flawlessly in every app she uses.

  • Ubuntu shows its roots (Score:3, Funny)

    by stinky wizzleteats (552063) on Saturday March 11 2006, @07:43PM (#14900345)
    (http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Thursday October 05 2006, @10:36PM)
    I think Ubuntu is just trying to silence critics that say that they've run off and abandoned Debian. I think that delaying the release date is a move to get back to the distro's roots.
  • I'm listing the specs for Ubuntu, and I'm glad to read that many things I had complained about in Hoary [slashdot.org] seem to be fixed, like network availability for installation and upgrading.

    Some example specs (copied / pasted) :


    The current i386/amd64 CD boot loader (isolinux) and configuration are not very user-friendly. Prompts can only be displayed in one language, and responses must be typed in by the user.

    We should evaluate available options for replacements, and ways to simplify the process for the user, including:

      - Displaying a countdown and automatically continuing after a timeout
      - Allowing language selection from the boot loader
      - Localized help

    ---

    Upgrading from one Ubuntu release to the next is currently a power-user operation, involving editing of configuration files, careful attention to the decisions made by the packaging tools, and manual cleanup of obsolete or unwanted packages. This process should be wrapped in a tool (perhaps as extensions to update-manager), suitable for backporting to breezy-updates, which simplifies it for users, incorporating:

    Automatic detection of the availability of a new release, offering an upgrade to the user

    Preservation of user package selection (e.g., via metapackages)

    Removal of obsolete packages (e.g., openoffice.org, python2.3)

    Warnings about unsupported packages?

    Do something sane with old kernel(s)

    Upgrade packaging tools (including itself) first?


    This is what all linux distros should do, start listening to the users instead of relying on the old "RTFM n00b" cliché.

    I'm sure that if Ubuntu keeps doing all of these user-friendliness checks in a couple of years, Ubuntu will match the usability and installation-friendliness of WinXP, yay! :D
    • Errata by Spy der Mann (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @10:45PM
    • Re:Wow. by kwandar (Score:3) Sunday March 12 2006, @09:23AM
  • Ambitious features makes for perilous releases by Ravalox (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @08:07PM
  • Comparison by nexcomlink (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @08:27PM
  • Firefox version by wilfie (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @08:35PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Polish by dohcvtec (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @08:50PM
  • Its not April 14th but March 14th by ravee (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @10:17PM
  • Request by LittleLebowskiUrbanA (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @10:41PM
  • I'll Wait for Fixes by ArizonaKid (Score:1) Sunday March 12 2006, @12:58AM
  • To answer the question... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Theatetus (521747) on Sunday March 12 2006, @01:33AM (#14901269)
    (Last Journal: Tuesday February 24 2004, @06:10PM)
    Is it really worth delaying the release for more then a month just to polish it out a little bit?

    Yes. It is. Full stop.

    Free software ships When It Is Ready. That's why it's better.

  • Default installed packages by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Sunday March 12 2006, @01:59AM
  • Ubuntu and Debian by ClamIAm (Score:1) Sunday March 12 2006, @02:42AM
  • It really seems that we are somehow connected... by Pecisk (Score:2) Sunday March 12 2006, @11:59AM
  • just to polish it out a little bit? by mnmn (Score:2) Sunday March 12 2006, @12:37PM
  • Ubuntu release cycle by wysiwia (Score:1) Monday March 13 2006, @01:34AM
  • Enterprise linux releases need wxWidgets libraries by wysiwia (Score:1) Monday March 13 2006, @01:45AM
  • 6 weeks is not enough by tka (Score:1) Monday March 13 2006, @06:23AM
  • Re:User friendly? by LeonGeeste (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @04:51PM
  • Re:User friendly? by LiquidCoooled (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @04:54PM
  • Re:User friendly? by LeonGeeste (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @04:56PM
    • Re:User friendly? by Duhavid (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @05:03PM
    • Re:User friendly? by dadragon (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @05:24PM
    • You toss control back to whatever would otherwise load when it fails.

      The fact that you're not a software engineer shows.

      Want to know what would have otherwise loaded? The Windows Bootloader, which would have been within the exact same 512b sector that Grub now occupies. Boot loaders on PCs are extremely restricted in what they can do -- their code can be no larger than 446b in size, they run in real mode, and basically must rely directly on BIOS for all of their I/O routines.

      In effect, this is 1980's technology, and flexability is virtually nil. The primary boot loader can't just pass its duties off to another boot loader, as there aren't really sufficient instructions available to do this, and the two boot loaders cannot occupy the same space on the drive.

      If you're looking for something to blame for this situation, it's the fact that the architecture of the PC BIOS hasn't changed significantly in more than 20 years. It's still firmly rooted in the days of 160KB floppy booting, where the idea of a second-stage boot loader for choosing what OS you want to boot would never have occurred (want to boot a different OS on a diskette-only system? Use a different boot disk). BIOS should have died a long time ago.

      Boot loaders like GRUB do the best they can with what little resources and possibilities they are given. I'm sorry that the GRUB developers don't have access to your screwy system to test and debug on. Here I've run GRUB on a variety of systems, and the only machine I ever found which had problems with it is one with a built-in nVidia chipset, back in the Fedora Core 2 days, which was easily solved by switching to a different boot loader.

      Yaz.

      [ Parent ]
      • Re:User friendly? by bigpicture (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @06:45PM
        • Re:User friendly? (Score:4, Informative)

          by XMilkProject (935232) on Saturday March 11 2006, @07:19PM (#14900265)
          (http://www.xmilk.com/)
          IANAE but I think that the vast majority of your printers rely on patented Adobe technology, and as such, each manufacturer is on different versions and licenses.

          I am, on the other hand, an expert on a technology called SVG, and I know that there are alot of guys at Canon working with the w3c on something called SVGPrint, which they are looking to use as an Open/Free mechanism to transmit data to all their printers. (In place of postscript?).

          There is alot of work going on in these fields, but it will take a little bit longer until some of the newer open technologies hit the market.
          [ Parent ]
      • Re:User friendly? by Kancept (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @07:04PM
      • Re:User friendly? (Score:4, Informative)

        by Waffle Iron (339739) on Saturday March 11 2006, @06:22PM (#14900013)
        What can we do to minimize this negative consequence?

        As many others have pointed out, in 446 bytes, we can't do anything. All the Microsoft boot loader have historically done when it barfs is print something like "NT Loader not Found", and then left you "locked out of your system", just as GRUB did.

        BTW, you're not really locked out. You can create a GRUB boot floppy and manually boot into your OS installation. You can also use the Windows CD to set the MBR back to its original state. Or you could use most Linux distros' rescue CDs to fix the problem.

        [ Parent ]
      • Re:User friendly? by Paladin128 (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @06:27PM
      • Re:User friendly? by Yaztromo (Score:3) Saturday March 11 2006, @06:42PM
      • Re:User friendly? by Criterion (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @10:17PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:User friendly? by frogstar_robot (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @11:00PM
    • Re:User friendly? by LeonGeeste (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @05:09PM
      • Re:User friendly? by moonbender (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @05:36PM
      • Re:User friendly? by Paladin128 (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @06:31PM
      • Re:User friendly? by RobertLTux (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @07:08PM
      • Re:User friendly? (Score:5, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 11 2006, @07:12PM (#14900238)
        > spits control back to whatever would load in the absence of GRUB having been installed.

        The BIOS knows you want to boot from your hard drive, it does one simple thing to facilitate this, it loads the first 512 bytes from the drive into memory, and it tells the CPU "start executing here". Should the code in those 512 bytes fail, the bios has nothing further it can do, it only knows how to do one thing, grab the 512 bytes and let them execute.

        You installed Stage 1 of GRUB in the MBR (first 512 bytes of the drive). When you installed it, you installed it over top of the 512 bytes that were Microsoft's MBR. This is what was there before GRUB was installed, and now it is gone, completely written over, and neither GRUB nor the bios can do anything about it.

        I think you would probably like it if the grub installer put a backup copy of the Microsoft MBR somewhere else on the drive, and you would like stage 1 of GRUB to load and execute those if there is any problem. But, if there is an error loading those 512 bytes, absolutely nothing can be done.

        There is a perfectly valid explanation for why stage 1 might fail and why the microsoft MBR doesn't.

        Stage 1 of GRUB (installed in the mbr) has 1 job, load a file from your Ubuntu partition, /boot/grub/stage2. GRUB needs to do this because it is bigger than 512 bytes, so stage 2 contains all of the GRUB code that doesn't fit in the first 512. GRUB needs to be this larger than 512 bytes because it's a really advanced boot loader, it even understands file systems, which allows it to load configuration files, initrds, kernels, and modules by reading the file system, instead of having hard coded locations of those files location (by disk geometry) rammed into it. (this really helps when you update, replace, or change those files!)

        The Microsoft MBR also has a simple job. It looks, at the partition table for partitions marked as bootable, takes the first one, loads the boot sector of that partition into memory, and executes it.

        So stage 1 of GRUB and the Microsoft MBR really have a lot in common, as they are both 512 bytes they really do shit all, they just attempt to load more boot code off the drive and let it rip. The crucial difference here is WHERE on the drive they play with. Microsoft MBR reads the partition table and the boot sector of the partition marked bootable. GRUB stage 1 reads the location of /boot/grub/stage2, a location which is hard coded with the disk geometry location of this file. (stage 1 doesn't understand file systems).

        As /boot/grub/stage2, the parition table, and the boot sector of your windows partition are completely differnt locations on the drive, it is entirely posible that GRUB stage 1 could have a problem, while the Microsoft MBR could not.

        What could be different about these different locations on the drive?

        If there was an error on the drive where /boot/grub/stage2 is located, but not in the partition table or boot sector of the Windows partition, one could fail where the other succeds.

        Or, maybe the hard drive is fine in all locations, but the mechanism used by these two MBRs to access it is not behaving as it should. What is this mechanism? Our frequenly buggy friend, the BIOS. The BIOS implements a interface that the MBR can use to get its job done. Something like
        load_sector_from_ide_drive( ide_channel, master_or_slave, block_number )

        Assume neither MBR has any bugs in calling this interface, what if there is a problem with the implementation itself? What if the interface promises that a block_number=(location of /boot/grub/stage2) is loadable, but a bug in the implementation means it only works for block_number=(location of partition table) or block_number=(location of boot sector). Who wants to bet that there are BIOS out there that only get tested by the manufacturer on MBRs that only load play with the partition table and boot sectors of partiti
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:User friendly? by jlarocco (Score:3) Saturday March 11 2006, @07:21PM
      • Re:User friendly? by ajs318 (Score:3) Saturday March 11 2006, @07:44PM
      • Re:User friendly? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Sunday March 12 2006, @04:32AM
      • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:User friendly? by LeonGeeste (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @05:15PM
    • 4 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Re:User friendly? by Tx (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @05:02PM
  • Re:User friendly? (Score:3, Informative)

    by ameoba (173803) on Saturday March 11 2006, @05:06PM (#14899619)
    (http://ameoba.0pi.com/)
    The problem is that, with a broken bootloader, you can't really 'bypass it'. The bootloader, by definition, is the first thing that runs. If it's broken, there's nowhere to put the logic to do anything else. Maybe if the PC had a more usable firmware than the BIOS we're stuck with, you might have some recovery route, but the way the platform is set up, you have no alternatives.
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:User friendly? by jdhutchins (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @05:07PM
  • Re:User friendly? by vertinox (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @05:15PM
  • Re:User friendly? by Cthefuture (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @05:36PM
  • by forlornhope (688722) on Saturday March 11 2006, @05:48PM (#14899832)
    (http://sjhserv.net/)
    Yeah, thats a common misconception. Ubuntu is not a snapshot of Debian Unstable. Multiverse is a snapshot of packages in Debian Unstable that are not in Universe, Main, or Restricted. Universe contains packages supported by the community, which is encouraged to work closely with Debian. Main and Restricted are both modules that are directly supported by Canonical. These packages are worked on heavily by employees of Canonical and while there is significant collaboration(some would like to see more, but thats a seperate debate) these packages are not just stabalized snapshots. Canonical puts a lot of time into Main and Restricted and you will often see versions of packages(and packages) that are in Ubuntu before they hit Debian. You can see that by the fact that Ubuntu Dapper currently has the prerelease gnome 2.13 while Debian still has 2.12. Please stop spreading this misinformation.
    [ Parent ]
  • by Cthefuture (665326) on Saturday March 11 2006, @05:51PM (#14899845)
    Yeah, I sort of agree. That's actually one thing I liked with Debian. Who cares if there is never a new version? The packages would still get updated. I miss that with Ubuntu.

    I have to admit that Ubuntu has many nice useability tweaks over Debian though. Ubuntu is almost install and run without thinking about it. Debian still requires a bit of work in certain areas.

    I really do wish there was an "unstable" Ubuntu though. Something where any new package can be stuffed, all bleeding edge junk like Debian unstable. I hate waiting months for another Ubuntu release when I want some newer version of something (eg. Breezy is still using Thunderbird/Firfox 1.0 when 1.5 has been out for ages; inline spelling, yum) and I dislike munging up my system by manually installing some newer version of a specific package.
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:User friendly? by Schraegstrichpunkt (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @06:04PM
  • Re:User friendly? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Jussi K. Kojootti (646145) on Saturday March 11 2006, @07:01PM (#14900189)
    Friendly suggestion for the next time you happen to ask for help in a user forum:

    Don't let your anger show. Frustration is understandable, but showing it makes you harder to communicate with. If you want people to help, don't make snide remarks.

    [ Parent ]
  • Re:User friendly? by TheoMurpse (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @07:10PM
  • Re:Why not release both 6.04 and 6.06? by Sri Ramkrishna (Score:2) Saturday March 11 2006, @07:21PM
  • Re:MP3 license (Score:3, Informative)

    by ajs318 (655362) <sd_resp2@earth[ ]d.co.uk ['sho' in gap]> on Saturday March 11 2006, @07:56PM (#14900386)
    If you live in the EU or the UK, and certain other countries, a software MP3 player licence costs nothing; the patents in question are not valid in those countries.
    [ Parent ]
  • A Link. by spaceturtle (Score:1) Saturday March 11 2006, @09:09PM
    • Re:A Link. by aristofanes (Score:1) Sunday March 12 2006, @12:20PM
      • Re:A Link. by spaceturtle (Score:1) Sunday March 12 2006, @04:42PM
  • Re:Strict schedules suck. Example: Microsoft Tuesd by CCFreak2K (Score:1) Sunday March 12 2006, @03:53AM
  • 16 replies beneath your current threshold.