6 ms·

I wish Ubuntu and debian would bin code names. I'm forever confused as to which release version has which code name. there needs to be one clear name for the re

by meaty 14y ago

I wish Ubuntu and debian would bin code names. I'm forever confused as to which release version has which code name. there needs to be one clear name for the release, which should be the version number.

qznc 14y ago
For past versions I assume everybody uses the number anyways. (How old is Hoary Hedgehog?)
- meaty 14y ago
  Until you have to frig around with apt sources which are all code name based.
  - qznc 14y ago
    Good point. They could easily use symlinks for version number apt sources, though.
    - meaty 14y ago
      Or just say sod it and use version numbers and do away with the names.
  - morsch 14y ago
    $ cat /etc/lsb-release DISTRIB_ID=Ubuntu DISTRIB_RELEASE=12.04 DISTRIB_CODENAME=precise DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION="Ubuntu 12.04.1 LTS"
danieldk 14y ago
The code names are not the problem, they are easy to remember and give an operating system more personality. It's the sheer number of Ubuntu releases within the time frame of one Windows or OS X release. Most people do not have any problem remembering OS X's code names. In fact, many of my friends and colleagues refer to OS X versions by their feline names. Most would be hard-pressed to come up with the version number of, say, Snow Leopard. (iOS is somewhat peculiar in this respect. Since people always tend to run the latest version, people often don't refer to particular versions.)
- dagw 14y ago
  Maybe if OS X is your primary or only OS. I use OS X as a secondary OS (a macbook air I use mainly while on the move) and it's one of 4 or 5 OSs I interact with regularly. I know my laptop run 10.7 and I know 10.8 just came out, but I have no idea which cat either of them are. The few people I know who also use Macs also tend to refer to the OS by number rather than cat name.
- crucialfelix 14y ago
  actually for OS X I have often forgotten and myself and many coders I know are one or more versions behind. I have to try to guess which cat is more bad ass: tiger or leopard ? I don't know which one would win in a fair fight. and I find it quite annoying that they officially describe them as tiger, leopard, snow leopard and yet there is nowhere in the OS itself to tell you this. About This Mac : 10.6.8
- Jare 14y ago
  > Most people do not have any problem remembering OS X's code names [Citation needed] because my anecdotal evidence suggests the complete opposite.
mike-cardwell 14y ago
I don't even bother trying to remember the code names. I've been using 12.04 for four or five months and I couldn't tell you the code name off the top of my head. If I really need to know it, I know I can just have a quick look in /etc/apt/sources.list
vacri 14y ago
Debian gets a new code name roughly every two years, surely that's not so hard? You're probably also going to get better results googling for a tech issue with "debian squeeze" than "debian 6", given that 6 is a more common term in general.
SeppoErviala 14y ago
They're going alphabetically if you haven't noticed.

by meaty 14y ago

qznc 14y ago

For past versions I assume everybody uses the number anyways. (How old is Hoary Hedgehog?)

meaty 14y ago
Until you have to frig around with apt sources which are all code name based.
- qznc 14y ago
  Good point. They could easily use symlinks for version number apt sources, though.
  - meaty 14y ago
    Or just say sod it and use version numbers and do away with the names.
- morsch 14y ago
  $ cat /etc/lsb-release DISTRIB_ID=Ubuntu DISTRIB_RELEASE=12.04 DISTRIB_CODENAME=precise DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION="Ubuntu 12.04.1 LTS"

danieldk 14y ago

The code names are not the problem, they are easy to remember and give an operating system more personality. It's the sheer number of Ubuntu releases within the time frame of one Windows or OS X release. Most people do not have any problem remembering OS X's code names. In fact, many of my friends and colleagues refer to OS X versions by their feline names. Most would be hard-pressed to come up with the version number of, say, Snow Leopard. (iOS is somewhat peculiar in this respect. Since people always tend to run the latest version, people often don't refer to particular versions.)

dagw 14y ago
Maybe if OS X is your primary or only OS. I use OS X as a secondary OS (a macbook air I use mainly while on the move) and it's one of 4 or 5 OSs I interact with regularly. I know my laptop run 10.7 and I know 10.8 just came out, but I have no idea which cat either of them are. The few people I know who also use Macs also tend to refer to the OS by number rather than cat name.
crucialfelix 14y ago
actually for OS X I have often forgotten and myself and many coders I know are one or more versions behind. I have to try to guess which cat is more bad ass: tiger or leopard ? I don't know which one would win in a fair fight. and I find it quite annoying that they officially describe them as tiger, leopard, snow leopard and yet there is nowhere in the OS itself to tell you this. About This Mac : 10.6.8
Jare 14y ago
> Most people do not have any problem remembering OS X's code names [Citation needed] because my anecdotal evidence suggests the complete opposite.

mike-cardwell 14y ago

I don't even bother trying to remember the code names. I've been using 12.04 for four or five months and I couldn't tell you the code name off the top of my head. If I really need to know it, I know I can just have a quick look in /etc/apt/sources.list

vacri 14y ago

Debian gets a new code name roughly every two years, surely that's not so hard? You're probably also going to get better results googling for a tech issue with "debian squeeze" than "debian 6", given that 6 is a more common term in general.

SeppoErviala 14y ago

They're going alphabetically if you haven't noticed.