9 ms·

I'm using 12.04 LTS quite extensively. For folk in a similar situation, how long are you thinking of waiting before switching to 14.04 LTS?

by scanr 13y ago

egeozcan 13y ago
For all personal/hobby projects, I can see myself switching within few weeks. For the "serious" bunch, I may be waiting until the middle of 2016, then I'll start migrating.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
Mchl 13y ago
Until 14.04.1 I suppose
- johnchristopher 13y ago
  IIRC it's Canonical's official stand to suggest users to wait for the first point release. I am sure I read this some days ago, from following a link posted here.
  - popey 13y ago
    Indeed, upgrades aren't prompted for LTS users in Update Manager (Software Updater) until the .1 release hits. Intrepid souls are of course free to upgrade before that.
k_bx 13y ago
I've switched couple weeks ago. I should say it's pretty stable.
kawsper 13y ago
I am currently on 13.04, I can't wait to upgrade to a newer version where this bug in Beanstalkd is fixed: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/beanstalkd/+bug/1239478 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/beanstalkd/+bug/12... I think I will upgrade when it is available on Linode.
- bretthoerner 13y ago
  Why wouldn't you build a newer package for 13.04, or try using the trusty package on it? I can't imagine waiting for a new OS release every time I needed a newer package.
  - kawsper 13y ago
    It is not really often I need a newer package than what is available, I can only think of Beanstalk because if this issue. I am not really that used to build my own packages, but it is something I want to learn. And I didn't know that I could download from another version, I will look into it, thanks ! :)
    - nisa 13y ago
      apt-get build-dep beanstalkd apt-get source beanstalkd # or in your case, download the newer source-package cd ./beanstalkd-1.x.x dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -us -uc This should do the trick. There are a lot of variations regarding the last line. Just google for Debian packaging or Ubuntu packaging tutorials. It really works well for minor changes. If you need to deploy it to several machines it's also possible to add a custom flag to the package version...
      - wiredfool 13y ago
        And it's an unbelievable pain in the ass when they change packaging styles, and the new src packages aren't compatible with the older build tools. IIRC, that happened between 10.04 and 12.04.
        danudey 13y ago
        It did, but it's only relevant for packages which actually updated their build scripts. A huge proportion of packages from 12.04 will still build fine on 10.04 (which I've been doing in order to backport certain packages to install).
- 13y ago
rumdz 13y ago
As soon as Elementary OS Isis comes out :).
- thinkersilver 13y ago
  Currently on 13.10 at home, 12.10 at work desktop, 12.04 on servers. I feel no need yet to upgrade my desktop and my servers. All my previous upgrades had been motivated by better config tools and installers or new software. All these issues have dealt with by earlier releases. I think the distro is no longer the conduit for delivering new software and 14.04 doesn't bring any compelling upgrades outside of Unity tweaks, which I don't use. I'm going to wait this one out.
  - johnchristopher 13y ago
    What about the support coming to an end for the desktop versions ?
  - SDGT 13y ago
    14.04 brings php5.5 and apache 2.4 on an LTS, which is a big reason for many to upgrade.
higherpurpose 13y ago
I'm thinking of trying to switch to it completely. I'll probably still need Windows for some stuff, but I'll try to use Ubuntu as my main OS once this LTS comes out.
butchlugrod 13y ago
I will probably start deploying new servers to this in about six months, once the community has explored any package quirks.
AhtiK 13y ago
I am on 13.10 with xmonad but will try to move to 14.04 LTS with Unity. This will happen as soon as I finish my Ansible playbook to get all my current Ubuntu tweaks and dev env setup implemented so I have a repeatable setup and can safely do a fresh install of my desktop as needed with zero manual work. Dotfiles alone didn't cut it and VPS provisioning frameworks like Ansible are great examples how desktops could be built as well :-) Feel free to track the progress at https://github.com/ahtik/dotdotbox https://github.com/ahtik/dotdotbox I'll try to keep it as universal as possible so it can be shared and tweaked in collaboration.
- dmix 13y ago
  I've wanted to be able to automate setting up a new Linux desktop on a new laptop for a long time. It's a drag setting up a new box, it takes nearly a month to get everything tweaked right after I switch to a new distro (which is far more often that I should be responsibly doing it). I've been thinking about setting up an Ansible script, I've never used it before though. How would this work on a new machine? Is it something you run post-OS install? I want to try it out with Arch Linux.
  - AhtiK 13y ago
    Yes, a playbook would run post-OS install. It's either executed locally or anything you can SSH to. If being careful enough one can support multiple OS-s with the same playbook (at least different Linux flavors) but it's definitely quite some maintenance like different package names and conf file locations etc. A playbook contains tasks like installing, removing packages, editing config files etc. The beauty of it is that if done correctly you can run the same playbook over and over again against the same computer and each task can be smart enough to know if it needs to be run or not. This makes updating your computer with the same or updated playbook very fast. With Ubuntu it's easy to get to the post-OS install, it's more involved with Arch Linux. I would first create an Arch box with Vagrant using Virtualbox. And then create a playbook that works with that virtual Arch box. If the box and ansible playbook is good enough then https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Moving_an_existing_install_into_(or_out_of)_a_virtual_machine https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Moving_an_existing_inst... At least in theory, I haven't moved Arch between VM and a real host myself... Of course you can also just do a manual Arch install and then run the playbook but that would miss half the fun of doing less by doing more.
qwerta 13y ago
I am on Kubuntu 12.04. There is a small problem with baloo indexer in kmail, otherwise it works great.
monster_group 13y ago
Ideally I would want to upgrade within a month or so (after major kinks have been worked out) but there is stuff that may not work with the new kernel (I extensively use NoMachine), so I want to make sure if I upgrade I can still use it. I'll first install it in VirtualBox and give it a try. If it works, I'll upgrade. There are disadvantages to sticking with 12.04 for too long. You get stability but you start missing out on the new features of the kernel and other daily use software like LibreOffice. So, I really want to upgrade as soon as possible.
njharman 13y ago
I'm of the "latest is greatest" school. I switch my desktop on release day. Week-month later (depending on issues) I deploy to testing machines. Month-three later (depending on issues, my work load, need for any upgrades) deploy on subset of production. If all is well, then to rest of production shortly thereafter. OTOH, Long Term Support. You shouldn't have to upgrade for awhile if its a pain for you.
negativity 13y ago
Ubuntu's user interface upgrades as of 11.10 (the "unity" interface) sucked so bad that I refuse to use Ubuntu beyond verision 10.04 on desktops/laptops. 11.10 was when I switched over to Mint and never looked back, and it seems that doing so was a wise move, given the Amazon adware/spamware/spyware that Canonical saw fit to include in more recent versions. http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1182 http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1182 Even though Mint includes proprietary binaries (like Flash and Audio/Video codecs), which may or may not contain opaque questionable material, at least the third party non-open-source software is something that (arguably) improves the distribution and actually serves a purpose for me, as the end user. Mint has changed over time too, though, and now I'm thinking about moving to a personally customized Debian image, and a hobbyist project. Hopefully it won't prove to be too demanding to pull off.
- mavhc 13y ago
  Upgrades break Mint though, it's like you're living in 1980, backup and reinstall? What's the point of using Debian variants if you have to do that?
  - negativity 13y ago
    Because I actually enjoy making my life more complicated, obviously! (it seems like a fun challenge)
- uhno 13y ago
  Regarding Unity, it's fairly easy to revert to the "classic" Gnome desktop, which is a good enough approximation of the old behavior for me. See, for example: http://askubuntu.com/questions/58172/how-to-revert-to-gnome-classic-desktop http://askubuntu.com/questions/58172/how-to-revert-to-gnome-...
- JeremyMorgan 13y ago
  I too was pushed to mint after 11.10 but I'm sick of Mint now too. Not only do upgrades break it frequently, but I find small 'glitches' that end up taking up too much time tracking down. Stuff like Wifi dropping, and icons in my taskbar dissapearing, random browser crashes etc. What I did was decide to sit down and do an Arch install. Yes it takes time, and yes you have to know what you're doing. But I invested the time up front, and now it runs very reliably, and faster on the same machine. I say if you want to GSD the best thing to do is set up something like Debian, Arch or Gentoo and invest the time setting it up so you can use it without problems later. I don't know about you but I have better things to do than screw with an OS all time, I have real work to do. These "harder" distros are great for that.
smithzvk 13y ago
I decided to go the LTS route as well. I actually don't know when they will actually release the new version, but I assume it will be before the end of April (do they always hit their target release month?). I will be upgrading fairly early; probably at the end of April. I have a big deadline in late April and upgrading Ubuntu will be my reward/punishment. I suppose I will listen for any disgruntled users before I make the plunge, however, and reassess if things look too problematic. Note: this is for a work machine, but a PC, not a server or something like that.
- eitland 13y ago
  > (do they always hit their target release month?) They decided to delay the spring release in 2006 to june, so it ended up as 6.06 instead of 6.04.
justizin 13y ago
since noone actually responded to your question, and assuming you are talking about on servers, i began testing our configs against trusty some time ago. I'm not going to switch right when it's released, but I am eager to move to it. You're going to get lots of things that you may have had to work for in 12.04, like a newer kernel and newer versions of system tools and libraries and your key server software, from OpenSSL to nginx/apache2, python, ruby, libc, etc.. The LTS cycle works, and I encourage you to begin testing as soon as you can, and in the future to test while it's in testing simply because you can - it's not expensive to throw up an instance here or there.
selectodude 13y ago
I'll upgrade once Ubuntu somewhat mandates it, which is 14.04.1. It's easier to not worry or care about it.
danudey 13y ago
Our organization is currently running on Ubuntu 10.04, which is reaching end-of-support next year, so I've begun a push to move to 14.04. All of our server installations are entirely automated so a lot of it will just be porting over the preseed variables to the installer, answering any new questions, and possibly moving to newer versions of some of our dependent software (a lot of which is equally out of date).
eikenberry 13y ago
The official Canonical/Ubuntu line on this is to wait for the first point release, 14.04.1... however long that takes. I think for 12.04 it took 2-3 months.
yeukhon 13y ago
Takes a year for me on average to roll all production to a new LTS. This includes giving package authors to release good package for the new LTS and testing. Moving to new LTS right away is often a suicide mission.
beagle3 13y ago
You have to follow the bug reports if you rely on stuff, e.g. this bug in 12.04 (which was not in 10.04) https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/669481 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/669481 has no released fix two years later - if you need your servers to consistently reboot after a power down without human intervention, you need to apply the fix manually (just inserting a line in a config file, but still ...). I know it says "fix released" - but after having to drive to reboot servers, I can assure you that is not the case. Personally, I'd wait at least 3 months, and follow bug reports before switching.

I'm using 12.04 LTS quite extensively. For folk in a similar situation, how long are you thinking of waiting before switching to 14.04 LTS?

by scanr 13y ago

I'm using 12.04 LTS quite extensively. For folk in a similar situation, how long are you thinking of waiting before switching to 14.04 LTS?

egeozcan 13y ago

For all personal/hobby projects, I can see myself switching within few weeks. For the "serious" bunch, I may be waiting until the middle of 2016, then I'll start migrating.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

Mchl 13y ago

Until 14.04.1 I suppose

johnchristopher 13y ago
IIRC it's Canonical's official stand to suggest users to wait for the first point release. I am sure I read this some days ago, from following a link posted here.
- popey 13y ago
  Indeed, upgrades aren't prompted for LTS users in Update Manager (Software Updater) until the .1 release hits. Intrepid souls are of course free to upgrade before that.

k_bx 13y ago

I've switched couple weeks ago. I should say it's pretty stable.

kawsper 13y ago

I am currently on 13.04, I can't wait to upgrade to a newer version where this bug in Beanstalkd is fixed: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/beanstalkd/+bug/1239478 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/beanstalkd/+bug/12... I think I will upgrade when it is available on Linode.

bretthoerner 13y ago
Why wouldn't you build a newer package for 13.04, or try using the trusty package on it? I can't imagine waiting for a new OS release every time I needed a newer package.
- kawsper 13y ago
  It is not really often I need a newer package than what is available, I can only think of Beanstalk because if this issue. I am not really that used to build my own packages, but it is something I want to learn. And I didn't know that I could download from another version, I will look into it, thanks ! :)
  - nisa 13y ago
    apt-get build-dep beanstalkd apt-get source beanstalkd # or in your case, download the newer source-package cd ./beanstalkd-1.x.x dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -us -uc This should do the trick. There are a lot of variations regarding the last line. Just google for Debian packaging or Ubuntu packaging tutorials. It really works well for minor changes. If you need to deploy it to several machines it's also possible to add a custom flag to the package version...
    - wiredfool 13y ago
      And it's an unbelievable pain in the ass when they change packaging styles, and the new src packages aren't compatible with the older build tools. IIRC, that happened between 10.04 and 12.04.
      - danudey 13y ago
        It did, but it's only relevant for packages which actually updated their build scripts. A huge proportion of packages from 12.04 will still build fine on 10.04 (which I've been doing in order to backport certain packages to install).
13y ago

rumdz 13y ago

As soon as Elementary OS Isis comes out :).

thinkersilver 13y ago
Currently on 13.10 at home, 12.10 at work desktop, 12.04 on servers. I feel no need yet to upgrade my desktop and my servers. All my previous upgrades had been motivated by better config tools and installers or new software. All these issues have dealt with by earlier releases. I think the distro is no longer the conduit for delivering new software and 14.04 doesn't bring any compelling upgrades outside of Unity tweaks, which I don't use. I'm going to wait this one out.
- johnchristopher 13y ago
  What about the support coming to an end for the desktop versions ?
- SDGT 13y ago
  14.04 brings php5.5 and apache 2.4 on an LTS, which is a big reason for many to upgrade.

higherpurpose 13y ago

I'm thinking of trying to switch to it completely. I'll probably still need Windows for some stuff, but I'll try to use Ubuntu as my main OS once this LTS comes out.

butchlugrod 13y ago

I will probably start deploying new servers to this in about six months, once the community has explored any package quirks.

AhtiK 13y ago

I am on 13.10 with xmonad but will try to move to 14.04 LTS with Unity. This will happen as soon as I finish my Ansible playbook to get all my current Ubuntu tweaks and dev env setup implemented so I have a repeatable setup and can safely do a fresh install of my desktop as needed with zero manual work. Dotfiles alone didn't cut it and VPS provisioning frameworks like Ansible are great examples how desktops could be built as well :-) Feel free to track the progress at https://github.com/ahtik/dotdotbox https://github.com/ahtik/dotdotbox I'll try to keep it as universal as possible so it can be shared and tweaked in collaboration.

dmix 13y ago
I've wanted to be able to automate setting up a new Linux desktop on a new laptop for a long time. It's a drag setting up a new box, it takes nearly a month to get everything tweaked right after I switch to a new distro (which is far more often that I should be responsibly doing it). I've been thinking about setting up an Ansible script, I've never used it before though. How would this work on a new machine? Is it something you run post-OS install? I want to try it out with Arch Linux.
- AhtiK 13y ago
  Yes, a playbook would run post-OS install. It's either executed locally or anything you can SSH to. If being careful enough one can support multiple OS-s with the same playbook (at least different Linux flavors) but it's definitely quite some maintenance like different package names and conf file locations etc. A playbook contains tasks like installing, removing packages, editing config files etc. The beauty of it is that if done correctly you can run the same playbook over and over again against the same computer and each task can be smart enough to know if it needs to be run or not. This makes updating your computer with the same or updated playbook very fast. With Ubuntu it's easy to get to the post-OS install, it's more involved with Arch Linux. I would first create an Arch box with Vagrant using Virtualbox. And then create a playbook that works with that virtual Arch box. If the box and ansible playbook is good enough then https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Moving_an_existing_install_into_(or_out_of)_a_virtual_machine https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Moving_an_existing_inst... At least in theory, I haven't moved Arch between VM and a real host myself... Of course you can also just do a manual Arch install and then run the playbook but that would miss half the fun of doing less by doing more.

qwerta 13y ago

I am on Kubuntu 12.04. There is a small problem with baloo indexer in kmail, otherwise it works great.

monster_group 13y ago

Ideally I would want to upgrade within a month or so (after major kinks have been worked out) but there is stuff that may not work with the new kernel (I extensively use NoMachine), so I want to make sure if I upgrade I can still use it. I'll first install it in VirtualBox and give it a try. If it works, I'll upgrade. There are disadvantages to sticking with 12.04 for too long. You get stability but you start missing out on the new features of the kernel and other daily use software like LibreOffice. So, I really want to upgrade as soon as possible.

njharman 13y ago

I'm of the "latest is greatest" school. I switch my desktop on release day. Week-month later (depending on issues) I deploy to testing machines. Month-three later (depending on issues, my work load, need for any upgrades) deploy on subset of production. If all is well, then to rest of production shortly thereafter. OTOH, Long Term Support. You shouldn't have to upgrade for awhile if its a pain for you.

negativity 13y ago

Ubuntu's user interface upgrades as of 11.10 (the "unity" interface) sucked so bad that I refuse to use Ubuntu beyond verision 10.04 on desktops/laptops. 11.10 was when I switched over to Mint and never looked back, and it seems that doing so was a wise move, given the Amazon adware/spamware/spyware that Canonical saw fit to include in more recent versions. http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1182 http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1182 Even though Mint includes proprietary binaries (like Flash and Audio/Video codecs), which may or may not contain opaque questionable material, at least the third party non-open-source software is something that (arguably) improves the distribution and actually serves a purpose for me, as the end user. Mint has changed over time too, though, and now I'm thinking about moving to a personally customized Debian image, and a hobbyist project. Hopefully it won't prove to be too demanding to pull off.

mavhc 13y ago
Upgrades break Mint though, it's like you're living in 1980, backup and reinstall? What's the point of using Debian variants if you have to do that?
- negativity 13y ago
  Because I actually enjoy making my life more complicated, obviously! (it seems like a fun challenge)
uhno 13y ago
Regarding Unity, it's fairly easy to revert to the "classic" Gnome desktop, which is a good enough approximation of the old behavior for me. See, for example: http://askubuntu.com/questions/58172/how-to-revert-to-gnome-classic-desktop http://askubuntu.com/questions/58172/how-to-revert-to-gnome-...
JeremyMorgan 13y ago
I too was pushed to mint after 11.10 but I'm sick of Mint now too. Not only do upgrades break it frequently, but I find small 'glitches' that end up taking up too much time tracking down. Stuff like Wifi dropping, and icons in my taskbar dissapearing, random browser crashes etc. What I did was decide to sit down and do an Arch install. Yes it takes time, and yes you have to know what you're doing. But I invested the time up front, and now it runs very reliably, and faster on the same machine. I say if you want to GSD the best thing to do is set up something like Debian, Arch or Gentoo and invest the time setting it up so you can use it without problems later. I don't know about you but I have better things to do than screw with an OS all time, I have real work to do. These "harder" distros are great for that.

smithzvk 13y ago

I decided to go the LTS route as well. I actually don't know when they will actually release the new version, but I assume it will be before the end of April (do they always hit their target release month?). I will be upgrading fairly early; probably at the end of April. I have a big deadline in late April and upgrading Ubuntu will be my reward/punishment. I suppose I will listen for any disgruntled users before I make the plunge, however, and reassess if things look too problematic. Note: this is for a work machine, but a PC, not a server or something like that.

eitland 13y ago
> (do they always hit their target release month?) They decided to delay the spring release in 2006 to june, so it ended up as 6.06 instead of 6.04.

justizin 13y ago

since noone actually responded to your question, and assuming you are talking about on servers, i began testing our configs against trusty some time ago. I'm not going to switch right when it's released, but I am eager to move to it. You're going to get lots of things that you may have had to work for in 12.04, like a newer kernel and newer versions of system tools and libraries and your key server software, from OpenSSL to nginx/apache2, python, ruby, libc, etc.. The LTS cycle works, and I encourage you to begin testing as soon as you can, and in the future to test while it's in testing simply because you can - it's not expensive to throw up an instance here or there.

selectodude 13y ago

I'll upgrade once Ubuntu somewhat mandates it, which is 14.04.1. It's easier to not worry or care about it.

danudey 13y ago

Our organization is currently running on Ubuntu 10.04, which is reaching end-of-support next year, so I've begun a push to move to 14.04. All of our server installations are entirely automated so a lot of it will just be porting over the preseed variables to the installer, answering any new questions, and possibly moving to newer versions of some of our dependent software (a lot of which is equally out of date).

eikenberry 13y ago

The official Canonical/Ubuntu line on this is to wait for the first point release, 14.04.1... however long that takes. I think for 12.04 it took 2-3 months.

yeukhon 13y ago

Takes a year for me on average to roll all production to a new LTS. This includes giving package authors to release good package for the new LTS and testing. Moving to new LTS right away is often a suicide mission.

beagle3 13y ago

You have to follow the bug reports if you rely on stuff, e.g. this bug in 12.04 (which was not in 10.04) https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/669481 https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/669481 has no released fix two years later - if you need your servers to consistently reboot after a power down without human intervention, you need to apply the fix manually (just inserting a line in a config file, but still ...). I know it says "fix released" - but after having to drive to reboot servers, I can assure you that is not the case. Personally, I'd wait at least 3 months, and follow bug reports before switching.