Long Term Support LTS release cycle
location: ubuntuforums.com - date: December 31, 2011
The announcement that future LTS desktop versions will be supported for 5 years is wise. Can this start with 10.04?
1. If you have 50 Ubuntu machines in a busy organisation like ours, with testing and training, it takes 18 months to deploy a release. Supporting 10.04 for longer gives valuable time to do the job properly.
2. 10.04 server already has 5 year support. The extra for the desktop is not such a big ask.
3. CRUCIALLY, the change to Unity is a big one: it simply needs more more time for us techie chaps to get familiar before we can even think about rolling it out in an office. It's not ready technically, nor is the UI yet generally acceptable.
4. Ubuntu needs to get a name for solid reliability and hardware support over time. 10.04 is only just getting there for things like current Atheros network cards or Sandy Bridge. We simply do need longer with our current, very competent and accepted LTS.
What is LTS (Long Term Support)?
location: linuxexchange.com - date: December 15, 2009
I looked it up in Wikipedia, and there is only one line there. Anyone have a more detail description for it. Ubuntu releases their OS with this notation, but I was unable to find a detailed descripton over what it means/includes. I've already read the Ubuntu notation but need a more general description, not how Ubuntu has implemented it.
Thanks for your help.
Long term support considered harmful
location: linuxquestions.com - date: January 27, 2015
Newbie: Installing from repository vs compile for the long term support
location: linuxquestions.com - date: June 8, 2010
I'm stuck on a question and wanted to ask the group.
Currently I'm a Windows admin who does part time Linux server installs. Most of the time I'm asked to deploy a generic Windows server, install a few basic applications and if needed some other applications like Nagios or Zabbix.
My question is for long term support, or patching should I be focusing on deploying with repositories to install applications or compile from source? In the Windows world you can patch and update from Windows Update, but is there problems using 3rd party repositories for future updates? Would one of these locations go off line?
Maybe I'm thinking too much into it?
How long does CentOS support a release?
location: ubuntuforums.com - date: August 2, 2006
I know that each version of RHEL is supported for 7 years after release. And I know that CentOS is a clone copy of RHEL only with logos removed. I was on their website but I couldn't seem to find how long CentOS supports each release before you have to upgrade. Does anyone know?
I might be getting a job soon and if that happens I'll be able to save up for my own computer to run Linux on. I've heard some horror stories about upgrading from the previous release of both Ubuntu and Fedora without doing a fresh install and it involves everything getting screwed up. If I wanted to reinstall my OS every year (or every 18 months) I'd stick with Windows and I'm looking for something that is useable but (and at the risk of sounding lazy) something that I can install, get support for, and not have to reinstall for a couple of years. Does CentOS, or any other non-commercial distros provide support that comes close to RHEL but remain relitively easy to use?
Using12.10, will I be able to upgrade to next LTS release after support finishes
location: ubuntuforums.com - date: April 23, 2013
I am using Lubuntu 12.10 and I was wondering if I can upgrade to an LTS release if it comes out after 12.10 is not supported.
Also, when is the next LTS release coming out? And will 12.10 be supported until then? Also, how will I know when I upgrade to a new release of Lubuntu and how do I upgrade to a new release? Will I know through Update Manager? And if I upgrade, will all my files be erased?
Sorry for all the questions but I genuinely need to know.
sudo apt-get uprade
have anything to do with upgrading to a new version.(new to the command)
LXer: Ubuntu 12.04.3 LTS Release Just Happened
location: linuxquestions.com - date: August 25, 2013
Published at LXer:
Friday afternoon marked the release of Ubuntu 12.04.3 LTS, the latest point release to the most recent Ubuntu Linux Long-Term Support update.
LXer: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS Release Schedule
location: linuxquestions.com - date: July 19, 2011
Published at LXer:
The release schedule for the upcoming Ubuntu 12.04 LTS operating system has been published on the Ubuntu wiki. The distribution will be released at the end of April 2012.
Proposal: Alternative release cycle for "mainstream" users (vs. existing flaws)
location: ubuntuforums.com - date: October 5, 2010
The idea is simple in words, requires a slight shift in priorities, but is nonetheless profoundly relevant to the realization of desktop Linux for the mainstream. I present a somewhat novel but circumstantially compelling proposal for a revamped Ubuntu release cycle that should prove especially attractive to one of Ubuntu's most highly sought-after demographics -- the "mainstream" computer users:
Stable base + rolling stable user software + optional system backports (kernel, modules, etc as required for new/unsupported hardware).
Before you hit that reply button with "been there, done that", "impossible", or another misunderstanding, consider at least the very first few points:
Although this proposal gives some personal examples, I am advocating for my proposal on behalf of everyone, but with heavy emphasis on "mainstream" computer users, to be defined below. I define "mainstream" user as the average computer user who knows little to
No LTS release for new machines?
location: ubuntuforums.com - date: July 23, 2011
Tried 10.04.3 live CD on my sandy bridge system. Motherboard network adapter not recognized. So I guess there's no LTS release for new machines. Or am I missing something?
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10