A good reason to use a stable distribution instead of a rolling one
- Inicie sesión ou rexístrese para enviar comentarios
I was hopping to see something like this in order to make me think twice about the rolling part. I love it to be honest, but things broke too often those times (and I really don't understand why), like if, in 2012, it is normal to let pass more "bugs" like those... But still, for those who want to know a good reason here it is (directly from Phoronix website):
* [http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTIxNDQ EXT4 Data Corruption Bug Hits Stable Linux Kernels]
The bug has been found on the 3.6.2 Kernel (available in the jxself repositories), but (apparently) is it also available on 3.4 and 3.5 Kernel.
Know comes my question (Yes because a topic without a question isn't fun at all).
Do anyone still use EXT3 ? Or EXT2 ? (Or another one for the record ?) And why ?
PS: Nothing to do with the post, but for those that want to put Trisquel (or any Gnu/Linux Distribution), on a USB Pen, SD Card etc... to transport it everywhere without using a laptop (for example) they should use the EXT2 type. (I can be wrong on that one but) Since it is a non journalised type you will have less writing and reading on the device and it will leave longer (I am saying this because usually those devices don't have a long I\O).
Sorry for the link in the post. I am still learning WikiMedia Tags and I forgot to preview it :s.. Here it is :
Oh that's very ugly.
I dunno about the topic. I just installed Archlinux and migrated it to Parabola GNU/Linux. Will probs move to use Parabola at home, if it works.
I've done the same weeks ago about at the same time when I discovered Parabola (I was using Arch Linux at that time).
Don't forget to do '''sudo pacman -Qdt''' in order to see what kind of non-free software is still installed after the installation of '''your-freedom''' package.
PS: If you use Gnome Shell or Xfce4 and are hopping to use the media keys, you're going to have a bad time xD (Because of the update to Xorg 1.13.
I am not shure how the rolling versus stable release model fits to Trisquel, since the distrib is based on Ubuntu, which is stable.
I have been using various rolling release distros for quite some time (arch64, aptosid, Sabayon) and never run into severe issues. As everything in live rolling versus stable release models have advantages and disadvantages.
For average Joe user and stable daily use without the need for the latest bleeding edge stuff I would suggest a very stable distro such as Debian 6. If you are a more skilled user, like to get the lastest stuff but are willing to tinker / work out possible issues, then a rolling release is for you.
Keep in mind that even regular updates for a stable distro can break your system pretty similar to a rolling release. Stable release models do not automatically imply a more stable usage than rolling release models do.
As for breaking a USB / flash-based medias I still have not managed my 16GB Sandisk USB stick which previously stored Trisquel and now hosts arch. We had a lengthy discussion here in the mailing list on this topic. Search and judge yourself.
As for filesystems I am a bit conservative and stick either to ext3 or ext4. For now I would not touch butrfs, reiser or XFS for example.
"Stable" Ubuntu systems basicly break two times a year when you upgrade to the next STS, if you do a full reinstall.
Untrue...running Xubuntu 11.10 on my main PC and never had any issues because of any sys update (which I do always on time).
Ubuntu has a bad reputation though in regard what they consider "stable" (Pulse Audio just as an example).
Note I wrote "if you do a full reinstall", which I do always. In that you install everything from scratch, which is effectively like your system would had broken.
Yeah, I know I would not have to do a full reinstall.
I agree that booth have advantages and disadvantages.
What makes me the most "sad" when talking about a stable distribution (not debian since I never used it long enough), is the idea of not getting things repaired until the new version is out.
Take this as an example. Software ABC has an issue, but not a security issue, let's say a user issue, like Pencil Animation (available on the Trisquel Repositories) that won't let us export the work since it crashes. You have 2 kinds of distributions handling the problem, is this is what happens (if the development is active of course):
Stable Distribution (Like Ubuntu):
- Bug is reported
- Problem is solved (but some times not reported upstream)
- Solution will be provided in the next version of Ubuntu.
Stable Distributions Based on... (Like Trisquel based on Ubuntu)
- Same steps as Ubuntu
- Solution will be provided in the next version (+ mostly 6 months on this case)
Rolling Distribution:
- Bug is Reported
- Solution is/can be found, and a patch is applied
-- Patch is applied to the upstream project until a new version is out
-- Patch is applied to the current version as a "-2" version (like 1.0.1-2)
And this is why I mostly prefer the rolling model. Not because of the latest and greatest, but mostly because those problems take less time to be correct, and are more in agree and respect of the creator's work since the patch is applied directly to the main project and not to the package itself.
Now, I know that we have some upsides and some downsides, but a mix of the 2 could be very good.
As an example. I mostly don't care if (for example), Gnome Shell on Arch Linux is 3.4 (almost 3.6) and Gnome Shell on Trisquel is still 3.0... but why all the bugs ? (I am taking Trisquel as an example and I know the hard work that Ruben already has but this is just a pure example nothing more). I can take another example, I reported, weeks ago when I was still using Ubuntu, a bug about the megadrive emulator that had dependencies problems, and when we installed it, apt-get asked to remove the Kernel (how usual is that in Ubuntu...) so I talked about a possible solution, the problem was solved my someone else, and I was happy :D The problem was that the patch will only appear on the 12.10 Version... and it was on middle on June (if I remember right), so I had to wait until October to play megadrive games on this emulator.
Arch Linux had the great idea to make the Testing and Core/Extra/Community repositories in a separate camp, like this we can only use the stable, already tested, and patched packages available... What could happen ? Well, the usual... the package is working great, but it isn't compatible with the new package that came out (like this problem with Xorg and almost every DE out there).. So what could be the solution ? Easy, wait until the DE's are updated, and then, once again, this wouldn't be a Rolling Distribution anymore..
So for this case I agree with the grey area. And to be honest, I would be very happy to put my hands in the "dirt" if Ruben decided to go for a "Only LTS" version, with is own update system completely different from Ubuntu but based upon the same core. Like this we could continue to update Abrowser when it is necessary, and when it is ready, with the final goal of having a beautiful, and free, mix of Debian and Ubuntu (+ Arch Linux), taking the best of everyone. I'm even pretty sure a lot of people would come just to see how it works and that even may inspire other people :D
(Once again sorry for the long text).
[root@liekune ~]# pacman -Qdt
[root@liekune ~]#
No non-free software. The package "your-freedom" should had removed them when I installed it because it conflicts with non-free packages.
Indeed the multimedia keys does not work. I only use them to adjust volume though, but for that I find them very handy and much better than to use mouse.
I use gnome-shell, it is good to have a system where gnome is not broken or altered in some peculiar ubunty way. Also, it is nice to have a much better control what you install in the first place. Parabola GNU/Linux is a very good tool in building my "own distribution" for my needs.
I can be wrong but the powerbutton don't work either (at least on my laptop) and the screenshot button doesn't work as well... As long as I can tell those are the only problems.
EXT4 I believe had advantages for flash media. You can disable
journalling. Search EXT4 disable journal. I use EXT4 with an disabled
journal on my USB flash drive installs.
On 24/10/12 12:14, name at domain wrote:
> PS: Nothing to do with the post, but for those that want to put Trisquel
> (or any Gnu/Linux Distribution), on a USB Pen, SD Card etc... to
> transport it everywhere without using a laptop (for example) they should
> use the EXT2 type. (I can be wrong on that one but) Since it is a non
> journalised type you will have less writing and reading on the device
> and it will leave longer (I am saying this because usually those devices
> don't have a long I\O).
There is an awesome blog talking about that procedure :
http://fenidik.blogspot.pt/2010/03/ext4-disable-journal.html
Thank you for tip, didn't knew that this could be possible :D
I stopped using ext3 as soon as ext4 was declared stable and appeared as an option on my Ubuntu install.
I noticed an around 50% increase in speed on my hard drive operations, as it was reported by other people. So I don't ever think of going back.
I like the control that Arch/Parabola offers of your computer, but the *bleeding* edge nature of them, turns me away. I prefer stable and LTS releases, where most of the bugs have already been discovered and, hopefully, resolved (or will, as the long time passes by) because, as the mentioned example shows, some of them take a long time being noticed and discovered (and, surely, also resolved).
- Inicie sesión ou rexístrese para enviar comentarios