Slashdot Mirror


Canonical To Release Ubuntu Linux 16.04 LTS 'Xenial Xerus' Tomorrow (betanews.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Canonical announced today that it will be releasing Ubuntu 16.04 LTS on Thursday, April 21. The sixth major release of Ubuntu Long-Term Support (LTS) features the new 'snap' package format and LXD pure-container hypervisor. "The addition of 'snaps' for faster and simpler updates, and the LXD container hypervisor for ultra-fast and ultra-dense cloud computing demonstrate a commitment to customer needs that sets Ubuntu apart as the platform for innovation and scale," said Dustin Kirkland who leads platform strategy at Canonical. Ubuntu 16.04 LTS introduces a new application format, the 'snap', which can be installed alongside traditional deb packages. The snap format is much easier to secure and much easier to produce, and offers operational benefits for organizations managing many Ubuntu devices, which will bring more robust updates and more secure applications across all form factors from phone to cloud.

18 of 207 comments (clear)

  1. About time! by Maelwryth · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Thursday, April 21....where? Can't we just do it in UTC. It is Thursday, April 21 in New Zealand (18.23% PURE and dropping) already but there is no release. Is the date based on South Africa? U.S.?

    --
    I reserve the write to mangle english.
    1. Re:About time! by fishscene · · Score: 4, Informative

      Based on experience, Ubuntu will be released at the last possible moment on April 21st for the last people on Earth (Literally!) to still be in April 21st. It'll be available for most people on the 22nd I'm sure.

  2. Re:Ubutntu usuable when? by kamapuaa · · Score: 3, Interesting

    My wife isn't a computer person and is totally fine using Ubuntu Linux. She thinks it's basically the same as Mac OS, but with a different color scheme.

    --
    Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
  3. Might be asking too much by ilsaloving · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I may be asking too much here, but I would love to know what people think of 16.04 from a real-world, practical perspective. What can you do with it that you couldn't with previous versions? What, in your opinion, has improved? Any issues? For example, I haven't been keeping a close eye, so this is the first time I've heard of this new snap system. Is it any good?

    But I suspect the forum will just be filled with the usual "systemd sux!" and "pulseaudio sux" and "I can't stand Unity, and Shuttleworth is an asshole, use linux mint or instead!"

    But here's hoping for a civil discussion for once.

    1. Re:Might be asking too much by geek · · Score: 4, Informative

      Its quite good and I say that as an Arch user.

      Snap is basically sandboxed apps the way Mac OS and now Windows is doing. It greatly simplifies deployment and dependancies. It also creates a number of issues but you should google it for more info.

      Unity is greatly improved and very stable. The biggest change to me is the use of the GNOME software center instead of their own. I experienced a number of bugs with it and I'm not sure I care for it over the commandline yet. But for those who care, it's there.

      It's an LTS tho so people who prefer LTS should jump on this as it will have the newest packages fit for an LTS (in Ubuntu's standards of LTS which differe from that of Debian).

    2. Re:Might be asking too much by xtronics · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Snap is a really bad idea - instead of a common version of a lib - there are many - so code depending on a bug never gets fixed. Think of Windoze bloat..

      The beauty of the apt system is it polishes code over time.

      There is a way to install custom libs for development etc. - snap is mostly aimed at making microsoft happy and moving people away from other Debian based distributions.

      Full disclosure - I don't trust Canonical the for profit company behind Ubuntu - and the name stinks too.

    3. Re:Might be asking too much by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I may be asking too much here, but I would love to know what people think of 16.04 from a real-world, practical perspective. What can you do with it that you couldn't with previous versions? What, in your opinion, has improved? Any issues?

      I'd be happy to oblige, except...

      If I mention one problem, people are going to say "that's not ubuntu, it's the desktop!"

      If I mention another problem, people are going to say "that's an easy fix! Just go to /etc/mumble/bimple and edit fragbum.cfg file. Navigate to the "Enable Blather Frills" line and set the 1 to a 2 and that'll fix it.

      (Don't believe me? Try changing the swappiness: "sudo bash -c "echo 'vm.swappiness = 15' >> /etc/sysctl.conf". What the heck is swappiness anyway, and why did I need to change it?)

      If I mention a problem in any application, it's always "It's free. If you don't like it, why don't you build your *own* video editor?".

      I can't just report a bug on a project website, I have to register and "become part of the team!". Ten years after, and I'm *still* getting E-mails from the GCC project from a bug I posted. ("Respond with Unsubscribe" doesn't work, because my E-mail provider changes the subject line.)

      I've given up on both bug reporting and learning about programs.

      Basically, when I get an error message I just cut/paste the error into the search bar, click on the stack exchange link of the *first* person to get that error, and cut/paste the answer into my system. Usually it starts "sudo apt-get ".

      (I just recently fixed my emacs to not show the intro screen on startup. It took me 2 tries: firstly, I cut/paste the requisite line "(setq inhibit-splash-screen t)" only to find that I *already* have that in my config file! So then I tried adding "(setq inhibit-startup-message t)" and that didn't work either.

      I had to navigate: Options -> customize emacs -> top-level customization -> environment group -> initialization and set "inhibit startup screen" to on.

      All that seems reasonable if you know ahead of time where that option lives, but I defy anyone to find that option, knowing what you want to do and knowing that there's an option somewhere that does it. You have to sort through mounds of pages and options.

      Oh, and the options aren't always in alphabetical order, so even if you are following the StackExchange answer, it's always 'jest a liddle bit harder' than normal.)

  4. Re:Look on the bright side by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 5, Funny

    when it circles around, again, I think they should consider 'boaty mcboatface'. I've heard the name is available...

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  5. ZFS by dmoen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It includes ZFS as a standard supported file system. That's the most interesting new feature from my perspective.

    --
    I have written a truly remarkable program which this sig is too small to contain.
  6. Re:Any useful comments? by dlenmn · · Score: 3, Informative

    Scroll down for the release notes on

    https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Xenial...

    I've skimmed over it, and truthfully, I don't see major changes for my use case (normal desktop user of Kubuntu).

  7. Re:Any useful comments? by zwede · · Score: 3, Informative

    Plasma 5.5 is the default in kubuntu 16.04. If you're on KDE4 now you'll notice quite a big difference (for the better , IMO).

    http://www.kubuntu.org/news/ku...

  8. ZFS and GPL by dmoen · · Score: 5, Informative

    An AC said: "Which could get Canonical into hot water with the GPL."

    Whether or not this is a licence violation depends on Linus Torvalds and The Linux Foundation. They are the ones that set the terms for how Linux is licensed. Under U.S. law at least, it's the copyright owner's intent that matters, and not some third party interpretation interpretation of the licence text.

    Torvalds has previously stated that a kernel module can't violate the kernel licence agreement unless it is a derivative work of the kernel (and the module licence violates the GPL). At the very least, it needs to have been designed with knowledge of the Linux internals. Since ZFS was developed independent of Linux, it seems unlikely that The Linux Foundation will be suing Canonical.

    If you want to thoroughly understand the issues, you could read Eben Moglen's opinion (he's the lawyer behind the GPL 3): https://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2016/linux-kernel-cddl.html

    --
    I have written a truly remarkable program which this sig is too small to contain.
  9. Re: And the systemd unit files... by xtronics · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I use MySQL on Debian - have zero problems with systemd -- could it be your chair?

    It took me about a day to get used to systemd - I didn't ask for the change - but it seems to be somewhat helpful in the long run. Mostly invisible on the servers I run - just don't notice the difference. Worst feature of systemd? This command is too long to type when I'm sleepy:

    # systemctl list-unit-files --type=service

    Needs an alias.

    For the old farts that can't adopt ( I'm 61 - so you must really be old ) - there is help:

    https://wiki.xtronics.com/inde...

  10. Re:Who is... by narcc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't see what all the Ubuntu hate is about these days.

    This is normal. Ubuntu was exciting, a Linux distro that was suitable for the desktop. They'd even mail out free disks for you to distribute to friends and family, spreading the Good News, the gospel of Linus. Slashdot loved it. It was easy enough for your grandmother to use, painless to setup, and required very little maintenance. Everyone was happy.

    Then, it became popular. It was easy to find answers to questions, support, drivers, whatever you needed.

    Slashdot hates popular things -- especially popular things that are easy to use and support. If you want to be cool, be intentionally obtuse. Slack, Arch, and Gentoo are a safe bet for now.

  11. Re:What in the world is a snap? by doom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Okay, so software libraries were invented to have a standard place to put shared, common code, which allows bug fixes and so on to be applied in one place.

    And so stuff like "snap" packages are much less annoying, because every app gets it's own different versions of the libraries.

    But this means that if, for example, you try to fix a bug by updating a library, the snap package that uses that library won't get the fix, because it's go it's own variant of the library.

    And to actually fix a bug in a library, you need to update the version embedded in each snap package...

    (Someone please tell me this is wrong.)

  12. Re: Who is... by eggz128 · · Score: 4

    Wait... you installed a completely different distribution because you didn't like Unity? You didn't just sudo apt-get install kubuntu-desktop or xubuntu-desktop or whatever?

  13. Re:What in the world is a snap? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Having one central version and each app having its version both have pros and cons. The pros for each are both good, so the pendulum keeps swinging back and fourth. It will continue to do so until someone makes the effort to get both supported in an elegant way where everything is shared by default but programs with issues can be easily and automatically converted to the other way.

    From a developer's perspective, if your source control tree doesn't include every library you're using you're doing it wrong. Anyone should be able to checkout your code and run a single command to do a build. The only dependency should be the build tool (even better if there aren't any dependencies).

    From a system admin's perspective, trying to manage every program's libraries is a nightmare and wastes disk space.

    People who don't understand the pros and cons keep building system ontop of system to switch their current method to the one. They don't bother to consider why their current exists the way it does and instead only look at the pros of the new system. "I'm smarter than the guy before me, so we must do it this 'new' way." Most developers have no respect for current designs and know nothing about how we got there. For instance, almost no software follows the original OOP design. What people program now is a bastardization of the original principles. How is OOP on topic? The original OO design requires programs to include their own copies of libraries.

  14. Ubuntu "Tax Evaders Edition" by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 4, Funny

    Mangy Manx