Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ubuntu Linux 18.10 'Cosmic Cuttlefish' Arrives (zdnet.com)

Posted by msmash on from the new-os-releases dept.

Ubuntu 18.10 Cosmic Cuttlefish, the latest version of Ubuntu, is now available to download. From a report: Under the hood, the Cosmic Cuttlefish boasts the 4.18 Linux Kernel. This updates comes with better support for for AMD and Nvidia GPU, USB Type-C and Thunderbolt, a way for unprivileged users to mount Filesystem in Userspace (FUSE) can be mounted by, and CPUfreq performance improvements. On top of this, you'll find the freshest version of GNOME 3.30. You can, of course, use other desktops, but GNOME, since Ubuntu 17.10, is Ubuntu's default desktop. You'll be glad to know that GNOME is faster than it has been for a while. That's because some nasty memory leaks have been patched. Canonical has also added some performance tweaks that didn't make it into the GNOME 3.30 upstream. Ubuntu 18.10 also comes with a new desktop theme, the Yaru Community theme installed by default, for your visual enjoyment. Further reading: Ubuntu 18.10: What's New? [Video]; Ubuntu 18.10 Review; and Ubuntu 18.10 Flavors Released, Ready to Download.

41 of 99 comments (clear)

  1. slow memory leaks? by Jodka · · Score: 3, Insightful

    from the ./ summary:

    "You'll be glad to know that GNOME is faster than it has been for a while. That's because some nasty memory leaks have been patched."

    That's not what memory leaks do. Unless you leak so much memory that the system starts paging out RAM contents to the swap partition on the drive. Was it really that bad?

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature.
    1. Re:slow memory leaks? by slack_justyb · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yeah. It was pretty freaking bad.

    2. Re:slow memory leaks? by Tough+Love · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I still don't get why anybody puts up with Gnome when KDE is available. I really don't get why Ubuntu ships with Gnome standard. A whole lot more Windows users would make the switch if Linux presented with a normal desktop by default instead of whatever Gnome is trying to be, which seems to change every year and never seems to have a lot to do with what users need.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    3. Re:slow memory leaks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I bet that most Gnome users that tried KDE a decade ago said wtf, then went back to Gnome 2. Maybe KDE is finally good by now - it has a similar problem to Gnome 3 : "This time it's good, we promise!". But you have to learn not only the GUI, but all new applications. It's almost, or it is easier to go between Gnome 3 / Unity / Mate / XFCE / LXDE / Cinnamon / ... than from one of these to KDE, because KDE is the one with the different GUI toolkit that looks nothing else (so nothing looks the same : fonts, buttons, icons etc.), the file manager that isn't a Nautilus 2 clone, and the most "OS on top of OS" design.

    4. Re:slow memory leaks? by dunnomattic · · Score: 2

      Funny how things change. I recall when KDE went from 3.x to 4.0 and the exact opposite rationale was common. I stuck with KDE through the painful early 4 days and still use it today -- was an apologist during the rough years, but now I agree that it is the easiest transition for Windows users.

      --
      ...when everything is a crime, everyone is a criminal.
    5. Re:slow memory leaks? by rtkluttz · · Score: 1

      I don't necessarily agree with this. I think you are correct that Gnome 3 and Unity were both horrible. Horrible in the aspect of trying to force everyone to touch style interfaces. Horrible if you used the system for real work. Horrible if you used multiple screens, especially in a over/under format. Gnome 2 was much better at matching Windows than both KDE or Gnome 3 but even it fell short. But Cinnamon on top of Gnome 3 is absolutely fantastic. In my opinion it is better than all the other competitors. I think it is the most useful and full featured desktop to be here yet in linux and its defaults are sane for those coming from Windows but granular enough to satisfy people who have been using linux for a while. KDE is OK, but still falls short especially in sane defaults department. Its definitely customizable to anything you want it to be. But useful and familiar right out of the box... no.

      --
      Digital is, by definition, imperfect. Analog is the way to go.
    6. Re: slow memory leaks? by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Mate - a la Mint - is the easiest transition for Windows users since they're still more comfortable with the look of 2k than the retarded crap that's come since.

    7. Re:slow memory leaks? by Tough+Love · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Where to begin, there's a bunch of misinformation in your post. KDE was nearly always great except for the premature release of 4.0, which was only alpha quality but distros somehow didn't get the memo. You don't need to learn any new applications in KDE, the ones you already use work perfectly fine, including Nautilus, gnome-terminal, browsers, whatever. Look and feel exactly the same except window decorations will be whatever you set up in KDE, which can be almost anything you want.

      BTW, the reverse is also true: KDE applications like Kate (great editor) work just fine under Gnome. This is thanks to the cross-DE APIs developed by freedekstop.org, thanks much for that.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    8. Re:slow memory leaks? by iampiti · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I do like KDE better than Gnome but there's still many things about it I dislike. Nowadays I usually use Xfce, switching to KDE from time to time to see what's new.

    9. Re:slow memory leaks? by KiloByte · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I still don't get why anybody puts up with Gnome when KDE is available.

      Heck, even when twm is available. Anything available in that field is better than Gnome3. It's the epitome of what "UX designers" stand for. There are two valid directions for an UI to go for: ease for new users, and ergonomy for advanced ones. Gnome3 blows both to a ridiculous degree, at the same time trashing efficiency, portability (works on x86 only), and so on.

      I really don't get why Ubuntu ships with Gnome standard.

      Nor do I. It's the systemd of window managers.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    10. Re:slow memory leaks? by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      A whole lot more Windows users would make the switch if Linux presented with a normal desktop by default instead of whatever Gnome is trying to be

      That's why I tell people to try Mint+Cinnamon, it's the most approachable interface if you're used to Windows 7.

      --
      Circumcision is child abuse.
    11. Re: slow memory leaks? by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      I tried KDE several times over the years and it was garbage every time. Stuck with Gnome 2 for a long time, eventually went to Gnome 3. I abandoned Gnome during my upgrade to Ubuntu 18.4 this spring; I'm using MATE now and love it. Gnome and KDE are both too bloated and problematic, and offer zero advantages over MATE as far as I can see.

    12. Re:slow memory leaks? by youngone · · Score: 2

      I still don't get why anybody puts up with Gnome when KDE is available

      I don't either, but Gnome is the default desktop on three of the big distros (Ubuntu, Redhat and Debian) so there must be a good reason.
      I have given up trying to figure out what that reason is though, and just use KDE. Budgie seems like a nice option too.
      Isn't it nice to have choices?

    13. Re:slow memory leaks? by kbahey · · Score: 2

      Mod parent up ...

      I used KDE for about 12 years, then the move to 16.04 ruined a few things in it. Basically in two categories: a) things are no longer customizable, e.g. persistent notifications, and b) they removed some add ons, e.g. a working weather widget.

      So, almost 1.5 years ago, I switched to XFCE and never looked back. It is not as rich or customizable, but more than adequate for full time desktop use.

      Try Xubuntu 18.04 LTS. You will not regret it.

      --
      2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
    14. Re:slow memory leaks? by Tough+Love · · Score: 2

      Isn't it nice to have choices?

      Yes, choices are great. Nice defaults would also be great.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    15. Re:slow memory leaks? by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      "You'll be glad to know that GNOME is faster than it has been for a while. That's because some nasty memory leaks have been patched."

      I really hope 18.04 LTS will be patched as well and not be neglected as usual when a new version is coming, while LTS stands for Long Time Support

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    16. Re:slow memory leaks? by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      I still don't get why anybody puts up with Gnome when KDE is available

      Maybe because there is Kubuntu?

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    17. Re: slow memory leaks? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      KDE is slow as hell on ANY hardware.

      Rubbish, KDE runs just fine even on tiny embedded computers. Now crawl back under your rock.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    18. Re:slow memory leaks? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      I think often because people just say KDE as if it provides the answer. Better to say https://kubuntu.org/. I personally go with Kubuntu, although I do swap around with Gnome and have both accessible with just a configuration change at bootup.

      So the answer is not so much go with KBE as go with Kubuntu. One leads to more questions and the other leads to a direct simple answer, even if you already use https://www.ubuntu.com/ or http://edubuntu.org/ or https://lubuntu.net/. After all those links it would be mean not to put in https://www.canonical.com/.

      Linux == choice ;).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    19. Re: slow memory leaks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      As a very long time Linux user (continuously from 1998) I've primarily used gnome from pretty early alphas and betas. Diverted a few times to kde and bolt ons like enlightenment. However, i e stuck with gnome for quite some time now, even whilst Ubuntu has tried its own unique desktop path. Whilst i did like gnome 2 for its familiarity, i get what gnome 3 is all about. KDE is fine in my opinion. It's feature rich and very flexible. It is somewhat in-you-face though. The point of gnome 3 is that it's enough of a desktop to allow you to use your computer. If you want a bit more, you can install tweaks and get themes etc. But out of the box, it's just a slim desktop built from a rock solid toolkit. I can remember spending weeks fine tuning desktops in the past but the minimalist gnome we have today suits me. Don't forget that using Linux is about choice. I choose to use something better than Windows. The consequence of that is that i can choose a desktop that suits me. Want more bells and whistles, go for KDE, want something more lightweight then try gnome. Got an old pc that you need to use then try xfce. No choice is right or wrong. Of course, the great thing about Ubuntu is that you can choose between so many of these desktops packaged up for you.

    20. Re:slow memory leaks? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I don't understand how Gnome is even supposed to work. What is the workflow supposed to be?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    21. Re:slow memory leaks? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The one big issue no-one has managed to solve yet with desktops is starting apps. Apparently it's a really hard problem.

      In the early days you just had to navigate the file manager to the place on your hard drive where the app was installed and open it. On some systems that was actually pretty good because you could easily move apps around to organize them (e.g. RISC OS). Unfortunately on many systems it breaks the app if it isn't installed under the expected path, and it's also something of a security issue.

      Then Windows introduced the start menu and the desktop. Both were a pain to organize. The desktop just because a sea of unorganized icons, apps and documents mixed together until your screen was full. The start menu was unstructured and often apps were hard to find because they created a "Generic Soft 347" subfolder to hide in. You could organize manually but that broke when you tried to update or remove apps.

      Mobile systems and Ubuntu have a kind of app drawer, but it suffers from the same basic problems as the desktop and start menu. Search only kinda helps... I'm sure I installed a drawing app, but what was it called... "1nkur" or something...

      At least with mobile systems you can have folders on your home screen/desktop to organize with. Since the invention of the desktop in the 70s that's been about the biggest innovation in app management.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    22. Re:slow memory leaks? by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Cinnamon is in the Ubuntu repos these days, and Mint has made some... interesting technical decisions that makes me not trust their devs, so I'd recommend the Ubuntu version. There's very little difference between the two anyway. Mint is built on Ubuntu.

      (In case you're curious, the login system was at one point, don't know if it still is, built upon Webkit, with plugins enabled. I learned this when trying to log in only to have the screen blocked by Adobe Acrobat, which has a plugin Webkit was loading as root, putting up an EULA acceptance screen. Yeah, really. Again, remember, the login screen is run as root. And it's built on a generic web browser. Because... I don't know why. Wouldn't you want the login screen to be clear, simple, and secure? I know I would.)

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    23. Re: slow memory leaks? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      [Gnome is] just a slim desktop built from a rock solid toolkit.

      I don't know what makes you think that. GTK is and always has been, a big squishy mess that is awkward and err-prone to develop with.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  2. Went back to Debian by Tough+Love · · Score: 4, Interesting

    For something like 8 years, nearly everything on Ubuntu: desktops, laptops, severs. Because it was easy, with frequent updates. BTW, with KDE, not funky Gnome. But Debian progressed a lot in terms of not randomly breaking Sid like it used to, and "testing" stays a lot more current, so gradually started switching devices over, and everything new gets Debian instead of Ubuntu. Now just one laptop and one mostly unused desktop still on Ubuntu, probably will make the switch on those eventually, just for consistency. Netinst on a USB stick makes this super easy. There isn't really anything wrong with Ubuntu, they do a lot of good development that advances the whole community, and it's way better than Red Hat. But Debian, it's the real thing.

    Generally the difference between Ubuntu and Debian is completely invisible except when it comes to upgrading. Upgrading across major versions is no big deal in Debian but it can be a real crap shoot in Ubuntu.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    1. Re: Went back to Debian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      That mirrors my experience. One in place version upgrade of Ubuntu generally works ok but upgrading a second time is complete crapshoot. I've found Debian to be way more stable across upgrafes.

    2. Re:Went back to Debian by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      I still use Ubuntu (Mate LTS) for most of my 'user' machines because there *has* been work put into getting the basics working out of the box. I used to use Debian/FreeBSD and while everything would work, it didn't do it out of the box. FreeBSD and Debian both required a lot of configuration.

      Sometimes because of Debian's ideology on free. Shimming in drivers on install felt like Windows at times.

      Second, because of Debian's transient nature a lot of companies are releasing for LTS (Nvidia CUDA repos), which makes it easier to maintain.
       

    3. Re:Went back to Debian by Tough+Love · · Score: 2

      I'm not dumping on Ubuntu, it makes perfect sense as a factory preinstall or a no-fuss install for first-time Linux users. And it is perfectly fine for professional and power users. But pretty much anything you can do on Ubuntu you can also do on Debian, and usually in exactly the same way, so I prefer the one without the training wheels.

      Debian drivers isn't a big deal, you do need to add nonfree to sources.list and you might need to apt install some firmware. Without this your first boot can be pretty funky - a firebreathing GPU without the firmware tends to look like a primeval PC XT with a color graphics adapter. But it works well enough to run an editor and do the obvious fixups, turnaround time typically just a minute or two. I disagree that this feels like installing Windows drivers, maybe you forgot just how clunky the Windows driver experience really is. On rare occasions you might need to download and compile a driver or two from source, but that most probably won't be for base functionality. It's cool that you can even do that. BTW, it's amazing how many vendors offer Linux drivers on their sites now. I'm even seeing Linux-specific bios options in recent machines. I guess that means there are a lot of Linux users out there, and also, lots of in house Linux expertise at the vendors. My how times have changed.

      Anyway, I'm ok with Debian ideology. Without it, Debian would not be as good as it is, and there would be much less pressure on hardware vendors to do the right thing and open up. When ideology collides with proprietary stupidity, Debian hardly gets in the way, it basically just makes sure you know you're loading a bunch of mysterious binary crap, and you need to ask for that explicitly.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    4. Re: Went back to Debian by spongman · · Score: 1

      I havenâ(TM)t had issues with the debian zfs dkms recently and I have done many automated installs of production machines using it. But having it built in Ubuntu _is_ nice.

    5. Re:Went back to Debian by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Ubuntu snaps are fully supported on Debian also. These are not necessarily a bad thing. While I much prefer to install via apt, snaps allow users to install programs from their own use without needing root privilege. Given that users are going to do that one way or another anyway, this is more secure than needing root and much better organized than installing by hand locally. I guess, a lot of people are using snaps.

      Ubuntu custom kernel patches would be evaluated by Debian kernel maintainers, who also have their own patches, and added to Debian if there is a good reason. There is no waiting for upstream for important patches. Likewise, Ubuntu kernel maintainers track Debian kernel patches and pull in the important ones.

      I have no issue with Ubuntu supporting ZFS more than enthusiastically than Debian does, that seems right to me. ZFS is a license minefield.

      Both Ubuntu and Debian installers are very nice, I don't care that they are different. They both are pretty amazing, actually. I pretty much always do Debian net install, I don't see that Ubuntu should be faulted for requiring the network. After all, you're using apt, do you really ever intend to set up your own local repo?

      There are a whole lot more differences between Debian and Ubuntu than you listed, but nothing really bothers me. I just prefer Debian for a bunch of mostly minor reasons. Ubuntu is really Debian with tinsel, it is also a fine distribution, even with the ongoing UI idiocy, which you can easily opt out of.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  3. Re:A Good Linux that Works? by Tough+Love · · Score: 3, Informative

    What should I run if I just want a headless server with docker?

    Debian Buster or Stretch are good. I run Buster on a headless NUC with typically infinite uptime, just reboot every 6 months or so for a kernel upgrade. I removed Network Manager and just use old school Debian networking, more solid for a server. That was easy, basically just apt remove network-manager and set up /etc/network/interfaces in the usual way.

    I used to run Ubuntu on a server and there's nothing really wrong with it. But there's no advantage vs Debian either, and with a server, less is usually more. When it comes to security patches, Debian is about the best in the business.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  4. A question by Presence+Eternal · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Is native support for installing on nvme raid still limited to "You don't want to do that because reasons"?

  5. Unprivileged users by iampiti · · Score: 1

    It great that poor users can now mount filesystems.

  6. Only 9 months of support for 18.10. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Chose your production OS carefully.

    Only 9 months of support for 18.10.
    Most people shouldn't install it except on play machines or if their hardware is so bleeding edge that 18.04 can't handle it.

    I'm still on 16.04 because 18.04.1 has lots and lots of issues still. Perhaps by next June, 18.04 will be stable enough for production use, but I won't be holding my breath.

    If you install 18.10, you **MUST** move to 19.04, then 19.10. There is no choice from a support perspective. 20.04 is the next LTS after 18.04 LTS.
    Chose your production OS carefully.

  7. Re: wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Ubuntu is the official distro of the GNAA.

  8. Re:Systemd? Nothanks! by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

    systemd bashing is over. get used to it.

    --
    Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
  9. Re:Systemd? Nothanks! by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

    Which race condition? Where? How to reproduce?

    --
    Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
  10. Re:A Good Linux that Works? by sad_ · · Score: 1

    There is ubuntu server edition, the advantage to debian server is if you like to use the ubuntu server specific tools.

    --
    On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
  11. Mint here too... but planning to move to Devuan by gosand · · Score: 1

    I switched from Kubuntu years ago to Xubuntu, then to Mint XFCE, and have generally been very happy with it. XFCE is just right.
    I set my system up to re-install instead of upgrade, which used to be the preferred method. Then they started supporting in-place upgrades, and they went well.

    I am still on 18.3, and the current upgrade process seems to be getting more complicated. And since they adopted systemd as the init system, I have been facing some rather annoying issues.

    I have looked into a LOT of distros... and I will move from Mint to Devuan (XFCE) soon. I think Mint has started to lose its way, at least for me.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  12. Re:Interesting comments by basecastula+ · · Score: 1

    Weekend started early.

  13. Re:Systemd? Nothanks! by deepclutch · · Score: 1

    Debian has concluded that they are going the single init way - systemd way! :( No mercy to Devuan or antiX and such efforts to ensure init freedom. OpenRC+runit should've been elected as the default root instead of RedHat invention sponsored by agencies.

    --
    move to FOSS,save ur nation's resources.