8 ms·

Had a similar conversation about that just yesterday. Our company is using 12.04 and I was nearly floored to see it is soon entering end of life... A quick test

Had a similar conversation about that just yesterday. Our company is using 12.04 and I was nearly floored to see it is soon entering end of life... A quick test of 16.04 says, wow it is not going to be fun for us to upgrade...

aidos 9y ago
Oh really — what sort of things have you run into? I'll look at upgrading soon and I'm hoping 14.04 to 16.04 won't be too bad.
- dxhdr 9y ago
  Upstart is gone and systemd is here instead. It's a huge change.
  - jamoes 9y ago
    You can always switch back to upstart if you rely on it. It's a simple process: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SystemdForUpstartUsers https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SystemdForUpstartUsers
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - anonbanker 9y ago
      Thank you for this.
- sgs1370 9y ago
  We're moving from 14.04 to 16.04 and are about done with our migration development - the biggest difference I saw was systemd by default, although for the simple things we do with startup weren't too hard to migrate over. The other only other thing that impacted us was some changes in how the apt and puppet versions that are included by default act, a few things were either more strict or the (previously deprecated) things had actually been removed.
- yeukhon 9y ago
  Python 2 is not there. If you run on AWS, either have a task to download and install Python 2, or in your EC2's user data to install Python 2 (this is necessary for Ansible users).
  - pekk 9y ago
    Ironic since Ansible's lack of Python 3 support was due to vociferous insistence by key Ansible developers that it would be wrong even to allow the use of Ansible with Python 3 as long as popular CentOS versions did not have it.
    - yeukhon 9y ago
      I have to read it backward. Ansible is now part of RedHat. CentOS doesn't have Python 3, and some key Ansible developers have strong opinion on Ansible not supporting Python 3 in the near future. Am I reading it right?
      - deckiedan 9y ago
        Ansible has preliminary py3 support now. It works well enough for me on Ubuntu 16, only py3 installed.
        yeukhon 9y ago
        Which version?
    - collinmanderson 9y ago
      I think the bigger reason was Ansible needed to support Python 2.4 and 2.5 for old CentOS versions, making simultaneous Python 3 support very hard. They've now dropped 2.4 and 2.5, thus allowing Python 3 compatibility. https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/22721/files https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/22721/files (Though, it's worth noting that CentOS still does not have Python 3 support out of the box.)
brightball 9y ago
I still have a server running Hardy Heron somewhere
MikeKusold 9y ago
You may want to investigate CentOS. They offer 10 year LTS releases.
- yo-code-sucks 9y ago
  Because being lazy solves everything.
mattbillenstein 9y ago
I went through all the 2-year releases since 10.04 and if you go through it for every release it's a fairly small incremental change for the most part. That being said, systemd is a larger change, but I just use a single script to start supervisord, then run all my stuff under that anyway.
softwarelimits 9y ago
One of the most valuable aspects of Debian was (and hopefully is and will always be) the fact that a release upgrade was always possible and (at least for me) never caused any problems (rtm of course). The idea of "LTS" is a stupid reversion of something better we already had - the idea that upgrades are always reliable. Saying "LTS" for me sounds like "we have lost control over the upgrade process." Of course I must add that updating from Ubuntu 14.04 to 16.04 went ok on all machines I have seen (servers and also desktop workstations) - this should not be surprising, but the expected default, then we do not need no "LTS" theater.
- merlincorey 9y ago
  One of the major issues with current transitions is apache 2.2 to 2.4+ and other such large gaps that unfortunately will require manual configuration changes. There are many such instances of these gaps depending on where you are coming from and going to.
- mattbillenstein 9y ago
  LTS is a guideline about extended support, extended beta cycles, and less potentially breaking changes vs the non-LTS releases. I don't see it as saying much of anything about the upgrade path, but rather that if you do an apt-get update on an existing LTS box, you can expect to not get major version bumps of tools and libraries and thus less breakage. Of course, you don't get the latest and greatest software, but for most server deployments, that's a desired compromise. And at least I never do an upgrade anyway -- I always do a fresh install from one LTS to the next one on bare metal -- and simply recycle VMs in the cloud.
- sciurus 9y ago
  LTS is not about how reliable the upgrade from one version of the distribution to another is. It's about how long security and bug fixes will be provided for a version of the distribution. An Ubuntu LTS gets updates for 60 months. A non-LTS release gets updates for 9 months.

aidos 9y ago

Oh really — what sort of things have you run into? I'll look at upgrading soon and I'm hoping 14.04 to 16.04 won't be too bad.

dxhdr 9y ago
Upstart is gone and systemd is here instead. It's a huge change.
- jamoes 9y ago
  You can always switch back to upstart if you rely on it. It's a simple process: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SystemdForUpstartUsers https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SystemdForUpstartUsers
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - anonbanker 9y ago
    Thank you for this.
sgs1370 9y ago
We're moving from 14.04 to 16.04 and are about done with our migration development - the biggest difference I saw was systemd by default, although for the simple things we do with startup weren't too hard to migrate over. The other only other thing that impacted us was some changes in how the apt and puppet versions that are included by default act, a few things were either more strict or the (previously deprecated) things had actually been removed.
yeukhon 9y ago
Python 2 is not there. If you run on AWS, either have a task to download and install Python 2, or in your EC2's user data to install Python 2 (this is necessary for Ansible users).
- pekk 9y ago
  Ironic since Ansible's lack of Python 3 support was due to vociferous insistence by key Ansible developers that it would be wrong even to allow the use of Ansible with Python 3 as long as popular CentOS versions did not have it.
  - yeukhon 9y ago
    I have to read it backward. Ansible is now part of RedHat. CentOS doesn't have Python 3, and some key Ansible developers have strong opinion on Ansible not supporting Python 3 in the near future. Am I reading it right?
    - deckiedan 9y ago
      Ansible has preliminary py3 support now. It works well enough for me on Ubuntu 16, only py3 installed.
      - yeukhon 9y ago
        Which version?
  - collinmanderson 9y ago
    I think the bigger reason was Ansible needed to support Python 2.4 and 2.5 for old CentOS versions, making simultaneous Python 3 support very hard. They've now dropped 2.4 and 2.5, thus allowing Python 3 compatibility. https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/22721/files https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/22721/files (Though, it's worth noting that CentOS still does not have Python 3 support out of the box.)

brightball 9y ago

I still have a server running Hardy Heron somewhere

MikeKusold 9y ago

You may want to investigate CentOS. They offer 10 year LTS releases.

yo-code-sucks 9y ago
Because being lazy solves everything.

mattbillenstein 9y ago

I went through all the 2-year releases since 10.04 and if you go through it for every release it's a fairly small incremental change for the most part. That being said, systemd is a larger change, but I just use a single script to start supervisord, then run all my stuff under that anyway.

softwarelimits 9y ago

One of the most valuable aspects of Debian was (and hopefully is and will always be) the fact that a release upgrade was always possible and (at least for me) never caused any problems (rtm of course). The idea of "LTS" is a stupid reversion of something better we already had - the idea that upgrades are always reliable. Saying "LTS" for me sounds like "we have lost control over the upgrade process." Of course I must add that updating from Ubuntu 14.04 to 16.04 went ok on all machines I have seen (servers and also desktop workstations) - this should not be surprising, but the expected default, then we do not need no "LTS" theater.

merlincorey 9y ago
One of the major issues with current transitions is apache 2.2 to 2.4+ and other such large gaps that unfortunately will require manual configuration changes. There are many such instances of these gaps depending on where you are coming from and going to.
mattbillenstein 9y ago
LTS is a guideline about extended support, extended beta cycles, and less potentially breaking changes vs the non-LTS releases. I don't see it as saying much of anything about the upgrade path, but rather that if you do an apt-get update on an existing LTS box, you can expect to not get major version bumps of tools and libraries and thus less breakage. Of course, you don't get the latest and greatest software, but for most server deployments, that's a desired compromise. And at least I never do an upgrade anyway -- I always do a fresh install from one LTS to the next one on bare metal -- and simply recycle VMs in the cloud.
sciurus 9y ago
LTS is not about how reliable the upgrade from one version of the distribution to another is. It's about how long security and bug fixes will be provided for a version of the distribution. An Ubuntu LTS gets updates for 60 months. A non-LTS release gets updates for 9 months.