3 ms·
This is a rather frustrating distinction on packages. Canonical says: "Here, enjoy these packages in our base repositories" Many of those packages are complet
by bravetraveler 3y ago
This is a rather frustrating distinction on packages.
Canonical says: "Here, enjoy these packages in our base repositories"
Many of those packages are completely third party/somehow qualify for 'universe', and such, no longer get security updates.
Why rebuild/test only a subset for the upsell? They've taken stewardship by offering them at all, in my opinion.
On the other hand: Red Hat will support everything they offer during the lifetime of a release. They don't really pick and choose as far as I'm aware. Caveat: EPEL et al
They do have a limited lifetime release problem... but at least they support the whole release.
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago> On the other hand: Red Hat will support everything they offer during the lifetime of a release. They don't really pick and choose as far as I'm aware. Caveat: EPEL et al I mean, that's the distinction; Ubuntu just includes their EPEL equivalent in the default repos. If you leave out EPEL, then RHEL has far less packages (or did last time I was in that ecosystem), because RH does their pick-and-choose at the repo level.
- bravetraveler 3y agoWhat makes it frustrating is how Canonical handled it. Not offering something at all is far more 'honest' than building it once and never again