Ubuntu LTS Experiences X.org Memory Leak

MonsterTrimble writes "Ubuntu 10.04 LTS Beta 2 is experiencing a major memory leak due to patches for X.org. 'An X.Org Server update that was pushed into the Lucid repository last week has resulted in the system being slower and slower as it is left on, until it reaches a point where the system is no longer usable. ... In order to make the Ubuntu 10.04 LTS deadline, the developers are looking at just reverting three of the patches, which brings the GLX version back to 1.2. Ubuntu developers are now desperate for people willing to test out this updated X.Org Server package so they can determine by this Friday whether to ship it with Ubuntu 10.04 LTS or doing an early SRU (Stable Release Update). Right now this X.Org Server that's being tested is living in the ubuntu-x-swat PPA.'"

Comments

Valgrind?

[abigor]

How come this wasn't caught when they were profiling? Notice I said "when" - the X.org people aren't seriously deploying patches to such a crucial app without profiling first, are they?

Re:What?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the reason why hard release schedules kill Ubuntu. The devs slipped 6.04 to 6.06 for similar reasons, and the release was great. Contrast that with the scramble to get 8.04 released on time and then look at the mess it was in when it was delivered. It wasn't stable until 8.04.1. Ubuntu needs to be more flexible. Slip a month, fix this problem, then release. No biggie.

One of the problems with fixed release dates

[Qwavel]

I understand that fixed release dates are useful for planning, but I think Ubuntu has put too much emphasis on them. Software should not be released until it is ready.

The idea of releasing it on schedule, with this big bug in it, and then issuing a quick fix when it is ready (one of the options discussed) is silly and rather deceptive. If what they have on April 30th is only beta quality then don't call it a release just so you can say that you stuck to your schedule.

Re:One of the problems with fixed release dates

[Anonymous Coward]

If they don't slip the date, then Ubuntu can never be trusted as a product ever again.

That's a bit harsh, don't you think? If it is clearly a regression caused by a particular patch, they could release without that patch and just note in the release notes that a particular feature that was promised had to be dropped at the last minute.

Or perhaps you view the errata section in your daily newspaper as proof that it can never be trusted as a reliable news source again. :-)

Oh Noes!!!!

[geminidomino]

You've all got to help them FAST!

Because the world would, you know, end in a fiery ball of flaming death if the LTS ended up being 10.05!

(This policy is why I replaced Ubuntu on my desktop)

This is a LTS release...

[Rydian]

10.04 is supposed to be a LTS release, and they are nearing their deadline. Roll back to the "stable" version of X, and push these patches forward to 10.10. Anyone who cares about having the latest and greatest will roll along with the 6 month release cycle.

Ubuntu Lucid == Linux Vista

[Requiem18th]

Ubuntu developers are now desperate for people willing to test out this updated X.Org Server package so they can determine by this Friday whether to ship it with Ubuntu 10.04 LTS or doing an early SRU (Stable Release Update).

They should have thought that before antagonizing over 80% of the tester community with the windows button issue.

Yes, it IS a petty issue, the problem is that everybody said "We don want it, please revert pretty please" and Mark was like "Thank you, your opinions are very valuable, however, just bite it".

So I'm not surprised at all if the tester community feels withdrawn. There is a growing feeling that the opinions of the community are being soundly ignored, for instance these (public) statements from the bug tracker I'm going to reproduce without permission:

Jef Spaleta:

First of all I think you put too much weight behind Brainstorm as a tool
to drive change inside Ubuntu. You actually shouldn't be at all
surprised that Brainstorm popularity has very little influence over
design decisions. It's never had influence in any technical decision
making and no one in a position of authority inside Canonical or Ubuntu
governance has ever claimed that it has. Canonical nor the external
Ubuntu governance structures make it a policy to rely heavily or to even
officially review highly popular ideas in Brainstorm on a regular basis
or part of technical decision making or public governance discussion.
Were highly popular Brainstorm ideas even discussed in an organized
session during the UDS in the run up to 10.04?

The track record of implemented ideas backs up my point. You look
really closely at the ideas marked implemented in Brainstorm and they
are at best mediocre in terms of Brainstorm popularity. None of the
highly popular ideas in Brainstorm get implemented..or even discussed
publicly as a matter of technical decision making or governance. Take
for example the music store idea. It has a negative voting total and is
marked implemented.

It's wishful thinking to suggest that Brainstorm popularity plays an
important role in decision making. It doesn't. At best brainstorm is a
dumping ground for random ideas. There's no evidence that the voting
process correlates with feature development or decision making at all.

The thing is, Ubuntu has dropped the ball massively with this release, there is simply nothing good about the new release, worse still is that it lost contact with its user base, most of the decisions are now either politically or corporately motivated, or driven by the team of Cupertino rejects that Mark appointed to drive Ubuntu development.

But really, this is interesting, I'll get some marsh mellows and enjoy the fireworks. The question no longer is if Lucid is going to be an embarrassment but whether Mark will learn anything from it. If Mark learns a lesson it's well worth it.

I really loved ubuntu, I want to love it again, but right now, I'm just deciding whether to switch to mint or debian.