5 ms·
Because it conveys relevant information. If you were on version 7 and the new version is version 13, a message is conveyed that there have been several major it
by cookiecaper 14y ago
Because it conveys relevant information. If you were on version 7 and the new version is version 13, a message is conveyed that there have been several major iterations since your last upgrade. Numerical versioning schemes (in general) make it simple to know if you're on a current version, and if not, how far off you are.
Now consider trying to make similar determinations if you know you're running "Gingerbread" but the latest version is "Jelly Bean", or if you're on "Intrepid Ibex" and the latest version is "Raring Ringtail".
It's even worse on Ubuntu, where they've chosen a reasonable, useful numerical versioning system (year.month), but then obscure it with stupid codenames.
IMO it's also much more difficult to remember the codenames. I had to verify that Android 4.2 was still called Jelly Bean and though I knew the latest Ubuntu was 13.04, I had to look up its codename altogether.
The fact that these projects continue to have underlying "developer use only"-type numerical versions only further emphasizes the utility of these. The codenames feel like a poorly-conceived marketing thing. I don't think most people have trouble remembering a coupled software package with a version number, like "Windows 7". I don't think they often say, "Oh crap, I know I had version 4 of something ... was it Android or Windows?"
- dhimes 14y agoI can't upvote this enough. At least put the cutsie name in the goddamn uname -a result. Drives me bonkers having to look that shit up.
- discodave 14y agolsb_release -a is what you want.
- dhimes 14y agoThank you very very much. But I still think that it should be in uname -a. I have never heard of lsb_release... and I'm not new to the stuff. If they really wanted to improve UI, it would also be in the 'system settings' link under the username on the desktop panel- for users that run desktops.
- pdpi 14y agoFor what it's worth, Ubuntu versions are always Adjectivated Animals (with the adjective and the animal name always starting with the same letter), and ever since 6.06 LTS (Dapper Drake), they've been sorted alphabetically, incrementing the first letter with every release. So even without any further information, you can easily work out that Raring Ringtail is 9 releases ahead of Intrepid Ibex.
- jff 14y agoThe only good thing about Ubuntu version names is how easy they are to mock. I personally prefer "Onanistic Otter"
- Flimm 14y agoA not very well publicised guideline is that the codenames are only supposed to be used before release, and the version number after release. If you go to ubuntu.com they consistently use the version number, not the codename.
- cookiecaper 14y agoBut then the system still says things like "quantal" all over the place (like when "apt-get update"ing).
- vacri 14y agoThe unique names really help with googleability. 'debian 7' will return more chaff than 'debian wheezy'. "Where's the 7 on this site? Oh, it's the forum page number" and so forth. Similarly I can ask a dev in a mixed shop "is wheezy or precise on this" and it's easier than saying "is debian 7 or ubuntu 12.04 on this". Ubuntu numbers are unusually regular and unique, which helps their googleability, but other versioning numbers aren't.
- err_badprocrast 14y agowouldn't searching for "debian 7" with the quote marks fix that issue?
- azernik 14y agoWhich sacrifices completeness of results for accuracy - e.g. "my Debian version is 7" would not match the query.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]