Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Ubuntu Operating Systems Upgrades Linux

Ubuntu 10.10, Maverick Meerkat, Now Available 473

Posted by timothy
from the lucky-13 dept.
teeks99 writes "The latest version of Ubuntu — 10.10, called Maverick Meerkat — has been released. This release contains new improvements, like an update to the Ubuntu One online service (with music streaming), Shotwell instead of F-Spot, the new Unity interface (for netbooks), and an upgrade to just about every piece of existing software. The announcement e-mail has more details."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ubuntu 10.10, Maverick Meerkat, Now Available

Comments Filter:
  • Any good? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by LingNoi (1066278) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @09:25AM (#33851470)

    Has anyone given it a good testing? I've noticed a horrible trend that Canonical tends to rush their releases these days, especially today. Trying to hit the 10/10/10 deadline makes me wonder what they've left broken to meet their target date.

    • Re:Any good? (Score:5, Informative)

      by ManiaX Killerian (134390) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @09:56AM (#33851630) Homepage

      https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/625793 [launchpad.net]

      If you use a second keyboard layout and switching, don't upgrade, this still isn't fixed and it's hell, at random points in time it starts rapidly changing the layout, leading to weird results in what you type.

      Also there are two problems with the NVidia driver - one is that the text is horribly slow with the included driver, you need to install the beta from the site, and the other is that the nouveau driver fucks up the card and makes it impossible to use the card, so I had to revert to an older kernel. There's a bug for this too somewhere, can't remember the ID.

      • by lennier1 (264730)

        Thanks for the heads-up.

        After a previous kernel update once caused a kernel panic whenever I switched between wireless connections (e.g. activating hibernate at the office and reactivating the notebook back home) I'm kinda wary of these things.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by David Gerard (12369)

      I've been using it a couple of months on a Dell Mini 9.

      The upgrade was *flawless*. I've done enough bad Ubuntu upgrades that I find this remarkable, and very cheering. Ubuntu upgrades are notoriously terrible - particularly compared to how well Debian does - and I'm glad they appear to be paying more attention now.

      Using it has been just fine and absolutely smooth. I'm using standard 10.10, not the netbook version - there's no reason not to IMO.

      Two thumbs up! Four stars! Upgrade, er, tomorrow, when the serve

      • Re:Any good? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Sunday October 10, 2010 @10:20AM (#33851756) Homepage Journal

        The upgrade was *flawless*.

        I upgraded to the beta and I had to babysit the upgrade over about four days as they boned the package archive. LOADS of missing dependencies that caused the install to want to remove big pieces of my system, which it would probably have done with -y. You got very lucky, because my upgrades were painful. They did finally work though, and I am free of conflicts and unresolved deps... Now I'm just dealing with the bugs they introduced in this revision, like GDM not properly handling multiple monitors, or my one-of-the-most-common-models Cambridge bluetooth dongle no longer working. Well, bootsplash did vanish, and I never noticed.

        It would also be nice if on fresh installs to flash media Ubuntu would automatically disable readahead. Readahead from a flash device accomplishes very little and doing it from a SLOW flash device will increase your boot time significantly, as the machine NEEDS to have something to do while it is reading from the storage device. Right now it seems like Ubuntu has nothing to improve but eye candy, and so they are doing this and don't care if they break anything in the process.

        • by David Gerard (12369) <slashdot@davidge ... k ['co.' in gap]> on Sunday October 10, 2010 @10:49AM (#33851878) Homepage

          Obviously the answer is to move to a Dell Mini 9.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Mouldy (1322581)
      I've installed it on my Acer Aspire One netbook and for the most part it has been good. The new Unity interface has some severe performance problems in my experience though. Also, Unity doesn't currently let you do much in the way of customising it via GUI tools. Adding a custom launcher [ubuntuforums.org], for example, is quite long winded.

      I'm using the standard gnome interface on my netbook now. I think Unity's got potential to become something really quite good, but I don't think it's ready yet.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      It seems so far to be pretty good. It feels like a slight evolution of 10.04 rather than the huge leap 10.04 was from 9.10. There isn't a huge amount different, but that might explain why it seems much more stable than 9.10 and 10.04 were when they were initially released.

      The nicest new feature is the beautiful ubuntu font.

    • Re:Any good? (Score:5, Informative)

      by tomhudson (43916) <barbara.hudson@ ... a - h u dson.com> on Sunday October 10, 2010 @11:35AM (#33852146) Journal
      It's nothing new - google shows that the complaints make it clear that it's been going on for years [alphagfx.com].

      People try Ubuntu because of the hype, then tar all linux distros with the same brush.

      • Re:Any good? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Dr_Barnowl (709838) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @12:16PM (#33852438)

        Oh my ; the article that you link shows that the most popular Linux distro ... has more negative articles online about it than the others. Who'da thunk?

        If it showed that the ratio of positive articles to negative articles was different, that might be something, even if that might just reflect the relatively inexperienced user base of Ubuntu (because it's more popular, it's going to cover more of the bell curve of expertise). But it doesn't even try.

        It does compare it to Windows. Surprisingly, negative Windows articles are more popular than negative Ubuntu articles. Way to go with that insight.

  • Misleading (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Yes, but is it made with real Meerkat?

  • Kubuntu too! (Score:5, Informative)

    by russlar (1122455) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @09:26AM (#33851480)
    And kubuntu 10.10 released today also! get it here [kubuntu.org]
  • by Ender_Stonebender (60900) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @09:28AM (#33851486) Homepage Journal

    As I use neither Unity nor Ubuntu One, I'm going to be sticking with 10.04, which is the latest long term support version. In fact, I think I'll even install 10.04 instead of 10.10 when I buy a new computer later this year.

    I seem to recall previous, preliminary announcements claiming that there would be more items upgraded in 10.10. I wonder if I was imagining that, or if Canonical decide some of the other upgrades were not worth the effort? (Or maybe I was thinking of Xubuntu.)

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ludwigf (1208730)
      About the short number of changes: Its probably because most updates for ubuntu come from gnome and most of gnome devs are focusing on 3.0: refactoring, cleanup and not new feature.
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Yes, the user-space changes seem irrelevant.

      But, the kernel is worth the upgrade - along with some other userspace requirements that go hand-in-hand with the kernel.
      For example, the (newer?) Xorg for using newer features from the graphics/drm drivers etc.

      The newer kernel gives you:
      o. more h/w support (drivers moved from staging into mainline)
      o. newer filesystems (ceph anyone?)
      o. newer archs (tile is now included in mainline)
      - just to name a few reasons.

      Granted I haven't checked what all is actually

      • by PhrstBrn (751463) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @11:34AM (#33852138)

        Yes, the user-space changes seem irrelevant.

        But, the kernel is worth the upgrade - along with some other userspace requirements that go hand-in-hand with the kernel.
        For example, the (newer?) Xorg for using newer features from the graphics/drm drivers etc.

        If you're running 10.04, none of your applications will know how to use any of these new Xorg features. They won't know they exist

        The newer kernel gives you:
        o. more h/w support (drivers moved from staging into mainline)

        My hardware already works if I'm already running 10.04. Why would I need more hardware support?

        o. newer filesystems (ceph anyone?)

        Why does my desktop need ceph? Ext4 is plenty good for a desktop. If I'm running a server, why would I be changing the configuration of a production machine? Am I really going to be upgrading everything to ceph?

        o. newer archs (tile is now included in mainline)

        Whoo, now I can upgrade my x86-64 to a tile processor! This is the feature I needed!

        - just to name a few reasons.

        Granted I haven't checked what all is actually bundled, but if you can live with manually updating the kernel and the bits that go along with it, you can definitely stick with 10.04LTS provided you're not on paid support from Canonical which might get voided if you change the kernel.

        As time passes by, the distro is bound to get into equilibrium - at which point, we can't expect major changes.

        NONE of these reasons compel me to upgrade 10.04 a 10.10 on an already working, functional system. The only good reason would be if your hardware wasn't supported in the older kernel, but I'm assuming you wouldn't be using Ubuntu if your hardware wasn't supported.

        The only thing left to care about is userspace changes, but it sounds like the userspace changes are minor.

    • by digitalderbs (718388) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @09:55AM (#33851620)

      I find it frustrating that a more complete list of new features and new versions isn't listed with the announcement. I found this blog posting : http://linux.gauravlive.com/ubuntu/ubuntu-10-10-maverick-meerkat-whats-new/ [gauravlive.com]

      Gnome 2.32
      KDE 4.5.0 (QT 4.7)
      Default KDE browser Rekonq
      Pulse Audio is the default sound server
      Firefox 3.6.9
      OpenOffice 3.2.1
      Evolution 2.30.3
      F-Spot => Shotwell
      Btrfs now available (though, this is still experimental)
      kernel 2.6.35-22.33
      X.org version 1.9

    • by GF678 (1453005)

      The main reason why I try to use the latest version of Ubuntu is mainly due to having the latest kernel and packages. The latest kernel is obvious - bug fixes in things like filesystems, drivers and other lower-level components are rather important. Regarding packages, it's an unfortunate fact that despite PPAs, it's still a bitch to keep up to date with the latest versions of most software. Ubuntu generally only packages security and minor version updates for things, and that's generally not enough for a d

  • by Gopal.V (532678) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @09:29AM (#33851492) Homepage Journal

    As a photographer, I like Shotwell. As a programmer, I like it a little more than the mono updates that come along with f-spot (and I don't like Miguel).

    But here's what's kept me from abandoning gthumb2 for shotwell. Shotwell keeps pictures in ~/Pictures by default. There is no way for it to randomly pick up a directory and operate on it. I've often thought about hacking that up, but for Vala & the associated learning curve I've been too lazy to tackle.

    And now, for an encore can we kick tomboy too out of the CD?

    • by Shikaku (1129753) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @09:37AM (#33851534)

      Make sure you don't care about what's in ~/Pictures
      rm -rf ~/Pictures
      ln -s [folder you care about] ~/Pictures

      • by Shikaku (1129753) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @09:42AM (#33851562)

        Oh, and before someone rabbles "ITS THE COMMAND LINE THIS IS WHY LINUX IS NOT READY FOR THE DESKTOP RAGAGEDHDHA" there's a GUI way to do it: Right click the folder in nautilus and click Make Link, you'll get a shortcut. Delete the Pictures folder, cut and paste that link file that was made and rename it to Pictures.

        • by Vaphell (1489021)

          wtf, there is an option to change the collection dir in shotwell preferences, don't bother with symlinking

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by shadowbearer (554144)

            The preferences dialog didn't come until 0.6.1, the GP posts are probably using the older version.

              The newer binaries for Lucid (and Maverick) are here [launchpad.net].

            SB

        • by Hatta (162192) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @11:41AM (#33852176) Journal

          Compare:

          rm -rf ~/Pictures
          ln -s [folder you care about] ~/Pictures

          To

          Right click the folder in nautilus and click Make Link, you'll get a shortcut. Delete the Pictures folder, cut and paste that link file that was made and rename it to Pictures.

          Which instructions are really easier to follow?

          • by vadim_t (324782) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @12:33PM (#33852550) Homepage

            The command line ones. They often can be copy-pasted, and are much more language neutral (though not so much in this particular case)

            Language is a pretty big barrier for giving GUI explanations. For instance, I don't have my GUI in English, so if I were to try to explain this to somebody here, I'd have the problem of not knowing the exact name of the "Make Link" option. It could be "Make Symlink" or "Create Link" for all I know. But in the commandline, "ln" is always "ln", and the name of the Pictures folder is one of the very few deviations from that.

            • by m85476585 (884822) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @01:29PM (#33852958)
              But which one is easier to remember? The graphical ones. If I want to follow this procedure again in a year, what are the chances I'm going to remember those two lines exactly? Even a single character off could have bad results, ore more likely not work at all. Sure, most of us on /. have memorized simple commands like rm, ln, and their common parameters, but the average user is NOT going to memorize that, nor should they have to. The graphical procedure is visual and self-correcting. You need to make a link, so even if you don't remember exactly what kind of link, or how to do it, you see a simple "make link" option when you right-click on a folder.

              If I have to look up the command line syntax every time I want to make a link, it's a lot slower than just using the GUI method. I have to figure out what to type in the search engine, and sort through for something that tells me how to do exactly what I want to do.

              Another problem is long paths to directories. Sure, typing ~/Pictures is easy enough, but what if it's ~/Desktop/android-sdk-mac_86/tools (random example), or something worse. It is hard to accurately remember and type long paths in the command line, but with the GUI there is no chance for mistakes assuming you don't have multiple files with very similar names.

              Of course it's great that the CLI is there, but usability is a lot better if a GUI option is available too.
              • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

                by vadim_t (324782)

                But which one is easier to remember? The graphical ones. If I want to follow this procedure again in a year, what are the chances I'm going to remember those two lines exactly? Even a single character off could have bad results, ore more likely not work at all. Sure, most of us on /. have memorized simple commands like rm, ln, and their common parameters, but the average user is NOT going to memorize that, nor should they have to.

                That's why you make a script. Or copy/paste again from the original source, wh

              • by Hatta (162192) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @08:08PM (#33855366) Journal

                But which one is easier to remember? The graphical ones.

                Really? Using a GUI is a lot like going to the toolbox and grabbing a tool. Sometimes a tool gets misplaced and you're going to have to hunt for it. Words (like CLI commands) are always right there.

                Sure, we've all had the experience where a word is right on the tip of our tongue and we can't think of it. But it's an uncommon experience, which is why it's remarkable. We all have enormous English vocabularies that we can call up instantly. On the other hand, most of us lose something every day. I've learned to keep the important things (keys) at hand, but I couldn't tell you where the swiss army knife I was just using is.

                GUIs are the same way. When I use a GUI, I am constantly asking myself "ok, which menu was that command in?". With a CLI you never have to know where your commands are. Just speak the words and it is done. It's like a fucking magical incantation. That is what I call easy.

                If I have to look up the command line syntax every time I want to make a link, it's a lot slower than just using the GUI method. I have to figure out what to type in the search engine

                Search.. engine..? If you invoke 'ln' with no arguments, it tells you to use --help for more information. When you do that you get a nice list of options. It's all right there at your fingertips.

                Another problem is long paths to directories. Sure, typing ~/Pictures is easy enough, but what if it's ~/Desktop/android-sdk-mac_86/tools (random example), or something worse.

                That's what tab completion is for. This explains why you think the CLI is harder than the GUI. You're doing it wrong. The CLI has been around for long enough that it has tools to get around all these problem cases. The GUI is getting there. Features like desktop search are helping to solve the "where is it?" problem I described above. But, surprise, surprise, they do it by becoming more like the CLI.

          • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

            by CAIMLAS (41445)

            The first set of instructions. They're so easy a computer can follow them.

      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        That's a cool (and obvious) workaround, but it doesn't solve the basic deficiency of a tool that has to be used in a specific way which conflicts with many people's workflow. Ubuntu is on the "two steps back" model.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by zdzichu (100333)

        WTH?? Why are you avoiding mechanism which is in place for those things, namely XDG user dirs? Shotwell, as every good behaving application, uses directory which user defined for storing pictures. This define can be changed with command

          xdg-user-dirs-update --set PICTURES [folder you care about]

        Or by editing ~/.config/user-dirs.dirs.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 10, 2010 @09:32AM (#33851508)

    Over the past year or so it has become clear that even on heavy open source/Linux focused sites like Slashdot that the fanatical enthusiasm for desktop Linux that existed throughout the 2000s has mostly dissipated into a resignation that the dream is dead. OS X continues to leave Linux far, far behind in marketshare in the consumer space. And Windows 7 has squashed the now unrealistic dreams from the Vista days that consumers would abandon Microsoft for Linux.

    One just has to look at how Google took the Linux core and created a single stable set of APIs and development tools and have come to dominate the cellphone market in sales in just a couple of years and wonder what could have been with desktop Linux if it hadn't been for the juvenile license wars, API and desktop manager wars, and spinning cubes instead of real world usability that sums up most of the past decade of Linux development.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by RingBus (1912660)

      Windows 7 really has sucked the enthusiasm out of the push to get people to migrate to Linux. The huge amount of progress Microsoft has made with security and stability have left very little reason for the average home computer user to make a change.

    • by selven (1556643) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @10:14AM (#33851730)

      I'd be willing to bet that the only reason Windows 7 is any good is because of the competition from Linux. Even if you don't use Linux you still benefit from it.

      • by westlake (615356) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @11:27AM (#33852094)

        I'd be willing to bet that the only reason Windows 7 is any good is because of the competition from Linux.

        Linux is scarcely a blib on the radar.

        On the monthly Statcounter GLobal Stats [statcounter.com], Linux ranks lower than "Other." It is falling off the edge of the world.

        What drives Microsoft onward is it's thirty year run with Apple.

        • by schnablebg (678930) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @11:45AM (#33852198)
          Both Apple and Linux. Microsoft has serious competition of OS X in the desktop space, and from Linux in the server space. The Microsoft server offerings got orders of magnitude better when Linux starting taking off.
          • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

            by Elbowgeek (633324)

            Also note that Windows 7's current user interface resembles the bastard child of both Gnome and Finder ;-)

        • by O('_')O_Bush (1162487) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @01:18PM (#33852876)
          Quote from wikipedia, apparently taken from Bill Gates:

          "In January 2001, Microsoft CEO Bill Gates explained the attraction of adopting Linux in an internal memo that was released in the Comes vs Microsoft case. He said:
          &ldquo; Our most potent Operating System competitor is Linux and the phenomena around Open Source and free software. The same phenomena fuels competitors to all of our products. The ease of picking up Linux to learn it or to modify some piece of it is very attractive. The academic community, start up companies, foreign governments and many other constituencies are putting their best work into Linux.[122]"

          In short, Linux is much more than a blip.
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by selven (1556643)

          No, Apple has its niche of high-end computers and will not give it up. From that position it does not threaten Microsoft - Apple does not have a single laptop under $1k, so they have not made any netbooks, meaning that Microsoft continues to dominate the cheap market. Also, Apple has been generally ignoring much of the business scene. Apple does have iPhones and iPads, but those are not markets that desktop Windows could get into. This is why Linux is so dangerous - it attacks Windows in both business and o

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Ailure (853833)

          Other might not necessarily be desktop operating systems. Infact, I have a feeling it's various smartphone devices, consoles, etc. Infact I'm curious how large part of other is Android, which is based on the Linux kernel (but is unlike any other Linux distro, and did fork the kernel...).

          Considering the amount of computers around, I actually find 0.77% impressive since by those stats Mac is only "seven" times bigger than Linux. And Macintosh is widely advertised and have the whole brand thing, while there is

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Burz (138833)

      One just has to look at how Google took the Linux core and created a single stable set of APIs and development tools and have come to dominate the cellphone market in sales in just a couple of years and wonder what could have been with desktop Linux if it hadn't been for the juvenile license wars, API and desktop manager wars, and spinning cubes instead of real world usability that sums up most of the past decade of Linux development.

      No, the problem is in the techie delusion that something which is ONLY a core (Linux) can somehow be used to define & identify a complete, consumer-oriented desktop platform. There is no SDK for "Linux", hence it is hostile to application developers. There are no reference hardware implementations for the desktop. There is no official IDE that app devs can use to establish their footing on the platform. There is no corporate sponsor which takes responsibility for the delivered OS soup-to-nuts.

      Android ad

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 10, 2010 @09:36AM (#33851530)
    Every ubuntu release is announced here. Even RC ones. Why? Other operating systems and distributions are not. And is it news? I can tell you today: in six month ubuntu 11.04 will get released.
    • by icebraining (1313345) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @09:50AM (#33851598) Homepage

      Fedora: 12-beta [slashdot.org], 12 [slashdot.org], 13-alpha [slashdot.org], 13 [slashdot.org]-

      Windows: Vista SP2 [slashdot.org], 7 date announced [slashdot.org], 7 beta [slashdot.org], 7 [slashdot.org].

      Mac OSX: Tiger [slashdot.org], Snow Leopard [slashdot.org]

      You were saying?

    • by supersloshy (1273442) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @09:59AM (#33851650)

      Well, Ubuntu, like it or not, is the most popular linux distribution (that, or its users just have very loud mouths). I honestly don't see what the big deal about Ubuntu is anymore. Linux Mint does a much better job at being easy-to-use right out of the box (and doesn't make stupid design decisions involving window buttons... cough cough). For the more geek-inclined, Fedora is a very un-assuming distribution and makes for a much less awkward first experience compared to Ubuntu. And for the extremely geek-inclined, Arch Linux and just plain-ol-Debian are awesomeness. I'm using Arch right now, and if you can get it set up right the first time (thanks to their awesome documentation), you get a rolling release system with constant updates and a gigantic user repository of packages (I even maintain some packages for them, and it is to stupidly easy to make a pacman package that I'm never going back to deb/rpm)!

      Thankfully, it's incredibly easy to distro-hop if you don't like the current distribution you're using enough ;)

      • by Thumper_SVX (239525) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @10:14AM (#33851732) Homepage

        Although I would tend to agree with you, I use KUbuntu 10.04 today on my laptop and my MythTV box at home. Simply put, they're well put together, well supported and don't suffer from some of the strange GUI ideas that Canonical put in the regular Ubuntu (which shooed me away from it for a LONG time I might add).

        I have used Macs for years, and still have my Macbook Pro for a few applications I just can't get under Linux (for example my own business is mostly managed using iRatchet, and I still haven't got a good way to get music and podcasts to my iPhone from Linux) but it took playing with KUbuntu on my laptop to convince me that Linux was ready for me to return. I used to run all kinds of distros... I have run Fedora numerous times, Gentoo, Redhat... you name it. I like the fact that for the most part Kubuntu gets out of my way and lets me get my work done the same way OSX does. I've had a couple of issues with wireless network not working after updates, but I find a second reboot usually clears that up. Other than that, it's rock solid stable, gets me better battery life than Windows 7 on the same hardware and generally just works like an operating system should.

        Of course, freedom of choice is what Linux is all about anyway... and yes Mint is a great distro as well. However, I found that if I have a problem with Kubuntu it's usually much easier to find answers than it is for Mint simply because of the larger community of users.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Omestes (471991)

        Linux Mint does a much better job at being easy-to-use right out of the box (and doesn't make stupid design decisions involving window buttons... cough cough).

        How? All I can see is it is a reskinned Ubuntu with "restricted extras" and medibuntu installed. I tried it on my HTPC/Nettop and it was about as easy to use as Ubuntu, except with a dog-ugly and inefficient Windows XP menu. It did not live up to the hype. Yes, it was prettier, and yes it maintained Windows-style buttons, but this doesn't really

    • Every ubuntu release is announced here. Even RC ones. Why? Other operating systems and distributions are not.

      Not true. Announcements are also posted here for every minor tweak to BeOS and AmigaOS.

  • Slashdotted already (Score:4, Interesting)

    by hydrofix (1253498) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @09:56AM (#33851626)

    It seems that at least from my location in Northern Europe the ISOs are not downloadable due to the server having been already Slashdotted. But luckily the files are also avaialble as official .Torrents [ubuntu.com]. Download speed currently 3MB/s, or the absolute maximum my DSL can handle.

  • I was wondering why I couldn't connect to gb.archive.ubuntu.org today ...

  • by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Sunday October 10, 2010 @10:03AM (#33851678) Homepage Journal

    I started when it went beta and every night since I finally got my upgrade ironed out (it took days before they got the package database in order such that you could actually complete an upgrade and not have packages trying to remove themselves) I've been doing

    sudo at midnight
    aptitude update && aptitude -y dist-upgrade
    ^D

    Trying to upgrade today resulted in no updates, so I must be running final.

    Let's see if they fixed the bluetooth driver they broke... nope. Failed to set bluetooth power. The error reported is: Connection timed out. Thanks for breaking the world's most common bluetooth dongle, dumbshits. I see testing is alive and well at Ubuntu... wait, no it isn't. And this bug was reported multiple times, including by me, before the release, but apparently replacing the working image manipulation software with one that uses a hardcoded directory for your library was more important than fixing bugs that they created since Lucid.

    The market is ready for a Debian derivative that cares about stability and bugfixes. Ubuntu is like Wine, they break something every time they add new functionality and you can't trust that anything will continue to work through an upgrade.

    • by rmcd (53236) * on Sunday October 10, 2010 @10:56AM (#33851912)

      The market is ready for a Debian derivative that cares about stability and bugfixes.

      Why a derivative? Why aren't you just using Debian?

      • by LingNoi (1066278) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @11:20AM (#33852044)

        I wanted to try debian but it's simply not as accessible as Ubuntu is.

        When you go to Ubuntu.com you click the "Download Ubuntu" button and then hit "start download". Done and easy.

        When you go to debian.org you're greeted with information overload. Lots of completely useless information and I had to figure out that you need to go to "getting debian" link in the menu. After you're there I'm still mystified as to what I'm suppose to download. Testing? Release? No recommendation as to what to use.

        You click on the stable release and i386 and it shows you a list of 31 CDs.. lol wut? I'm suppose to download them all or what?

        Ok lets try again. debian.org -> click the "latest stable release of Debian" link -> intel 86 link -> ???

        Ok lets try again. debian.org -> click "available versions of Debian" link -> ... wait a sec that's the same as above!!

        Ok lets try again. debian.org -> click "getting a copy" -> oh great it's that getting debian page again..

        I give up!!

  • In spite of devoting so much attention to eye candy, Canonical forced on us the new GDM that doesn't bring anything useful over the old one, is incredibly ugly, and cannot be configured in substantial aspects. Has the situation changed with Maverick?

    I know, I know, this is only a login manager, and it works OK despite being fugly. But FFS, at least in Debian Squeeze the old GDM is one apt-get away.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by drinkypoo (153816)

      I know, I know, this is only a login manager, and it works OK despite being fugly. But FFS, at least in Debian Squeeze the old GDM is one apt-get away.

      It works "OK" at best. I have dual monitors. Boot happens on primary display. X comes up with the cursor one pixel to the right of center which puts it on the secondary display. The GDM menu (top or bottom of the screen, as configured) appears on the secondary display. The user chooser shows up on the primary display. This is the most goofy version of Ubuntu since the bad old days before Edgy, everything is like this. Bootsplash just went away during my upgrade, is it supposed to be text-only or did they ju

    • by Vaphell (1489021) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @10:22AM (#33851766)

      customization of the login screen? It was made obsolete by the gnome devs not by canonical and the reason for that was faster boot time. Yes, this sucks, I liked keyboard only logging but ubuntu team is not guilty here (unless you think they should keep and maintain legacy software)

  • by gravyface (592485) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @11:13AM (#33851998)
    Which was released over a year ago. For those of you wanting to do syslog email alerts, grab the latest .deb from Debian Squeeze.
  • Shotwell? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Ant P. (974313) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @12:39PM (#33852586) Homepage

    Will that one be able to open a folder of ~50-60 average JPEGs without choking on swap on a 2GB RAM machine?

  • by Dennis Sheil (1706056) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @02:10PM (#33853284)
    I have a multi-boot desktop Linux system with a 1.5 TB hard drive, a number of Linux distributions on different partitions (Debian, Gnewsense, Ubuntu), and some virtualized Linux distributions living as KVM'd images that I use on those distributions as well.

    Lately, what I have been primarily running has been Ubuntu's Maverick Meerkat's alpha and then beta. Not to suggest the alpha was always rock-solid - sometimes huge bugs crept up in it that had me switching back to my stable Ubuntu Lucid Lynx distribution. But if they were bad they were usually dealt with swiftly.

    Here is why I think Ubuntu, Canonical and Maverick Meerkat have done a great job.

    In February of this year, I was installing Debian squeeze on another system. Once installed, I looked in /etc/fstab to see information on my disk partitions. The disk information was in UUID format, and a comment line in fstab said "Use 'vol_id --uuid' to print the universally unique identifier for a device". So, I did what the file told me and did a "vol_id --uuid". But it didn't work. There was no vol_id program. I did a little digging and saw that the vol_id program had been a part of the udev package on lenny, but now it no longer was. The program to decode those mysterious UUID's had disappeared. I did a little more digging and discovered the blkid program in the util-linux package could decode those UUIDs. I tried it out, it translated the UUIDs to device names for me, and I was happy. However, I realized /etc/fstab was still giving everyone faulty information. So in February I filed a bug report [debian.org] with Debian.

    So now it is October, and my bug report sits in Debian's bug tracker, undisturbed by anyone. There have been four updates to the partman-target package (which creates the initial /etc/fstab) since my bug, but none implementing my suggestion to remove the outdated suggestion of using the no longer existent vol_id program, and replacing it with a suggestion to use blkid. In August, Debian squeeze froze in anticipation of release, so it becomes more unlikely my bug will be fixed.

    So where does Ubuntu stand with all of this? Well back in May, Ubuntu resynchronized their partman-target with Debian. While doing so, someone checked out Debian's bug tracker, saw my report, and fixed the problem in Ubuntu. While their change log [launchpad.net] in May notes this, I can see it myself when looking at /etc/fstab on my meerkat - "Use 'blkid -o value -s UUID' to print the universally unique identifier for a device".

    So this - I find impressive. I am having a problem with Debian and report a bug there, although it remains unfixed. But Ubuntu comes in and fixes the bug which was put on the bug tracker of another system.

    Yes, this is just talking about the quality of the distribution and not all of the other things involved, which of course, are important. I know how some Debian developers were (and some still are) unhappy with Canonical and Ubuntu, and how some other upstream contributors are unhappy with Canonical (like Linux developer Greg Kroah-Hartman) and so forth. And whatever acrimony exists, I think the Debian folks and Linux folks and the like are right that Canonical and Ubuntu have to find a way to push more patches upstream. Here is a case though where the bug fix was already upstream, but only Ubuntu decided to implement it.

    Considering that I got Ubuntu for free (as in beer), I have been very happy with the responsiveness of the (Canonical etc.) Ubuntu team to my problems and patches via their bug-tracking system, Launchpad. As far as I'm concerned, it is one of the best, and probably largest, testbeds of the Gnome desktop environment out there. I think it's really going to allow for a good, integrated Gnome desktop environment experience, and hopefully the Canonical/Gnome relationship goes w

  • Fun ride. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Requiem18th (742389) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @04:12PM (#33854108)

    I feel Ubuntu's momentum within the FOSS community is starting to fade.

    The greatest thing Ubuntu did was making a name. It attracted lot's of people and became something you can actually "sell" to business and the masses.

    Ubuntu also *had* the best mindset of volunteers, helping and polite instead of RTFM grunts.

    Lastly they also did a lot to push in the direction of hardware detection and ease of installation, yes, the Debian installer existed before Ubuntu but they set it up to actually work on most hardware.

    It was a fun ride.

    Nowadays Ubuntu seems to be stagnated, most progress is in relation to services like Ubuntu one and such. Good for Ubuntu of course but not news worthy anymore. More like newsvertisment.

    The few changes in the GUI also leave a bad taste in mouth, a sort of forced Mac-ness that nobody was asking for except the new "design" team. Worse yet in my POV is that the nicer volunteers are gone and are being replaced by a bunch of canonical yes-men.

    This year was the year I switched off Ubuntu, I no longer felt loyal to the brand and simply switched to the next best thing I found. For the first time in 6 years news of a new Ubuntu release don't concern me, for the first time in 6 years I wasn't counting down the days before the release, it feels odd.

    Thanks Canonical,thanks Mark, it was a fun ride.

    • Re:Fun ride. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by CAIMLAS (41445) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @10:13PM (#33855870) Homepage

      Lastly they also did a lot to push in the direction of hardware detection and ease of installation, yes, the Debian installer existed before Ubuntu but they set it up to actually work on most hardware.

      Seriously? No, that was the first thing Ubuntu did; it was (and is) the primarily reason that Ubuntu made a name. Amongst geeks, it was "hey, try Ubuntu, it's Debian but with better hardware support", and amongst the neophites, it's "try Ubuntu, it's an easy to use Linux".

      The volunteers, likewise, followed. They're there simply because it was easy to use, and wasn't Vista or XP (for the most part).

      If Ubuntu is 'starting to fade' it's for one of two reasons:

      * Hey, Windows 7 is out now.
      * Those people are growing up and not terribly fanatical - or they're graduating on to other things, like Debian or CentOS (or for that matter, jobs and girlfriends).

      My point is: do not marginalize the significance of "just works" installation and hardware support. That is quite important for any "doesn't come preinstalled" OS. The focused on the kernel and the pretty clicky graphics, whereas Debian, on which it is based, focused on utilities and tools. Those efforts, combined, resulted in a pretty solid system (yes, even now).

      It's the same approach used by Stormix and Progeny years ago - the efforts of which are, likewise, part of Debian today.

  • Wait what? (Score:3, Funny)

    by The_mad_linguist (1019680) on Sunday October 10, 2010 @04:36PM (#33854260)

    The timeline for this release is all wrong. It's only 20XX - we shouldn't be getting mavericks for another century.

If I have not seen so far it is because I stood in giant's footsteps.

Working...