4 ms·

It's stuff like this that made us deelpy regret using Ubuntu server LTS: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1023214 https://bugs.launchpad.net

by cft 14y ago

It's stuff like this that made us deelpy regret using Ubuntu server LTS: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1023214 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1023214 There's no real interest in fixing bugs like this ASAP, that makes any serious production deployment of Ubuntu a nightmare. And creates a lot of confused users: http://askubuntu.com/questions/11171/high-load-but-nothing-running http://askubuntu.com/questions/11171/high-load-but-nothing-r... http://serverfault.com/questions/272353/high-cpu-load-but-top-processes-in-top-all-around-0 http://serverfault.com/questions/272353/high-cpu-load-but-to... etc

harshreality 14y ago
Another fun one: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/iptables/+bug/982961 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/iptables/+bug/9829... The Precise (LTS) fix for those two iptables modules has still not been released.
oinksoft 14y ago
This raises a question I have: Why on earth would you use Ubuntu on a server instead of Debian? I've always seen Ubuntu as a desktop-oriented distribution, and never seriously considered it when I chose Debian very many years ago. The only advantage I can see to using Ubuntu on the server is for the more up-to-date packages, but if you're on LTS that advantage vanishes, right?
- thristian 14y ago
  If you install Debian Stable on the day it comes out, Debian promises[1] to keep issuing security updates until one year after the next stable release, whenever that might be. Usually they're about two years apart, although that varies unpredictably. By contrast, Ubuntu promises[2] that LTS releases will happen exactly every two years, and be supported for three more years after the next LTS comes out. That's an extra two years of breathing room to organise migrations and refresh production machines, which can be pretty important in a large enterprise. [1]: http://www.debian.org/security/faq#lifespan http://www.debian.org/security/faq#lifespan [2]: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LTS https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LTS
andor 14y ago
This is the bug that made me lose all confidence in Canonical and switch distributions. In 10.04, they cared about integrating a Twitter client into the panel, but failed to notice that the system load never went below 1.

by cft 14y ago

harshreality 14y ago

Another fun one: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/iptables/+bug/982961 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/iptables/+bug/9829... The Precise (LTS) fix for those two iptables modules has still not been released.

oinksoft 14y ago

This raises a question I have: Why on earth would you use Ubuntu on a server instead of Debian? I've always seen Ubuntu as a desktop-oriented distribution, and never seriously considered it when I chose Debian very many years ago. The only advantage I can see to using Ubuntu on the server is for the more up-to-date packages, but if you're on LTS that advantage vanishes, right?

thristian 14y ago
If you install Debian Stable on the day it comes out, Debian promises[1] to keep issuing security updates until one year after the next stable release, whenever that might be. Usually they're about two years apart, although that varies unpredictably. By contrast, Ubuntu promises[2] that LTS releases will happen exactly every two years, and be supported for three more years after the next LTS comes out. That's an extra two years of breathing room to organise migrations and refresh production machines, which can be pretty important in a large enterprise. [1]: http://www.debian.org/security/faq#lifespan http://www.debian.org/security/faq#lifespan [2]: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LTS https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LTS

andor 14y ago

This is the bug that made me lose all confidence in Canonical and switch distributions. In 10.04, they cared about integrating a Twitter client into the panel, but failed to notice that the system load never went below 1.