×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Ubuntu Dev Summit Lays Out Plans For Hardy Heron

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the hee-such-humorous-names dept.

Debian 261

Opurt writes "On the first day of the Ubuntu Developer Summit in Boston this week, a roundtable session focused on the vision for the upcoming Hardy Heron Ubuntu release. Unlike Gutsy Gibbon, which brought a handful of experimental features along with some new functionality, the focus with Heron will be on robustness as it will be supported on the desktop for 3 years. 'The Compiz window manager, which adds sophisticated visual effects to the Ubuntu user interface, will be a big target for usability improvements. Keyboard bindings and session management were noted as two areas where Compiz still needs some work.' PolicyKit and Tracker will also be significantly tweaked, while Heron is also likely to see a complete visual refresh."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

261 comments

Maybe it's time Ubuntu got a icon (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21210175)

The Debian swirl doesn't hack it any more.

Re:Maybe it's time Ubuntu got a icon (2, Insightful)

WheelDweller (108946) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211243)

Well, as a total outsider to the Debian mindset, let me offer this.

I used Redhat with the RPMS and all, even maintaining software. It was the second foray into Linux; the first time was with Slackware 2.3 and about 30 floppies. I stayed with Redhat from 4.0 until FC4, but by that time I was sick of the business bias. For about a year OpenLdap on their repo was busted. It was nearly herculean to get it to work, and keep it working. Then they offered a replacement to it in the purchase of the Netscape Directory, and I felt the time was right to look around.

Ubuntu has done a fabulous job with Debian's beginnings. They had the resources and the passion to make releases and push the envelope....but they couldn't have done it without what I CLEARLY see as the better package manager: Debian.

Personally, I love Ubuntu. And I've grown to love it, not just for it's lack of business bias, but for it's product as well.

We really owe a lot to "Deb" and "Ian" for their brilliant, visionary start.

Someone please tag this ... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21210179)


"hairy hardon"

Re:Someone please tag this ... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21210301)

Guess what, you insufferable nincompoops? Our government is itself the product of a market system. Cities like New York, London, and San Francisco are successful precisely *because* of their enormous governments--they compete for capital, talent, and prestige against cities with small, ineffectual governments that are unable to effectively lure and corral said capital, talent, and prestige. And as goes the city, so go city-states and nations: Somalia, being a libertarian paradise, is a rather unpleasant place to live for non-ideologues. Somalians, those who can, vote with their feet and leave.

Now go suckle Ayn Rand's rotten tits some more and leave the rest of us alone, you stupid fucking Paultards.

Re:Someone please tag this ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21210595)

Two words... Hong Kong.

Re:Someone please tag this ... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21210587)

Thanks, Rev. Spooner.

can we just use numbers, please. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21210781)

I know this comes from the great tradition of Debian "Woody".

But really, lets just use numbers.
Or at least no more stupid adjectives.

Apple didn't use Lanky|Leggy Leepard for reason.

Re:can we just use numbers, please. (5, Informative)

kazade84 (1078337) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211221)

The numbering system in Ubuntu is based on year, month of release (e.g 7.10) Obviously in development no-one knows if they are going to meet the deadline or miss it like they did with 6.06. This is the reason that the code names are used.

To make it clearer, development has just started on Hardy Heron, or what is likely to be known as 8.04. To start development the Ubuntu devs create repositories named after the codename (e.g. Hardy). If they used 8.04 and the deadline was missed and the release was actually 8.06 they wouldn't easily be able to change the repositories and other stuff.

The names are just code names, after release the number is the identifier that is used by Ubuntu (see if you can see 'Gutsy' on the Ubuntu.com front page, it's not there) its just usually the the code-names stick it peoples' minds.

So to sum up, the code names are there for a perfectly logical reason, and the animal thing is just a consistent naming theme that was chosen.

more details (5, Informative)

sayfawa (1099071) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210213)

Here's a better summary [fsckin.com] of things to come in Hardy, linked from an OS News [osnews.com] posting.

Re:more details (2, Funny)

zeromorph (1009305) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210335)

Installing Ubuntu from within Windows
ubuntu-install.exe... nuff said... might not make it though... it is listed as 'dangling' which means it can't be scheduled or has circular dependancies... no idea why it can't be made to work.
(from your interesting link [fsckin.com])

Don't whether that's a good idea.
But imagine the possibilities that such an exe-file would have as a spam-email attachement: "Mark Shuttlewort wants you to click on this link." or "Bigger hard drive, better performance! Click below!"

Re:more details (2, Funny)

MooseMuffin (799896) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210957)

Being tricked into installing linux is the least of your problems if you're getting spam with 700mb attachments.

visual refresh (1)

radeon21 (1183313) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210227)

"...while Heron is also likely to see a complete visual refresh." Thank God.

Re:visual refresh (0, Troll)

CasaVacas (720327) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211005)

I stopped reading the notes when they mentioned having a wood texture (to combat vista's glass and osx's metal) could be cool... I think i might wait a few more years before trying a linux distro.

Ubuntu To Do List (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21210235)

* Application bundles - drag and drop install, removal. Ability to drag an .app to anywhere in the file system at any time. App resources all contained in the .app directory structure instead of scattered all over the file system

* /Application directory - default place for App bundles to be copied to

* /Preferences - standard place for apps to store their user specific settings instead of hidden . files in the main user home directory

* An app interface building tool that has OS X level UI element default spacing when laying out an interface to help with the jarringly hideous problems virtually every Linux app has with visual layout

That should keep them busy for the next few years...

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1)

ericrost (1049312) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210287)

Rejected

Reason: Linux is not OSX, nor does it need to be.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (2, Interesting)

johannesg (664142) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210475)

Have you even considered the proposals on their own merits? Keeping a clean filesystem is a noble goal, and definitely worth considering.

Oh, and that attitude of yours is what I consider to be the *PRIMARY* thing that's wrong with Linux. But I guess it will be hard to fix as well...

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1)

JK_the_Slacker (1175625) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210693)

Keeping a clean filesystem is a noble goal, and definitely worth considering.

Your proposals have merit... in theory. But I have to ask the obvious question here: In just what way does Linux NOT have a clean filesystem? I like the idea that I can go back ten years later, on my still-running Slackware machine, and find a resume, or a paper from high school, or a backup of a game I bought way back when and am just now wanting to revisit. At least, I assume you're talking about the clutter of files that CAN accumulate on any filesystem if not properly looked after.

Oh, and that attitude of yours is what I consider to be the *PRIMARY* thing that's wrong with Linux.

Yes, the idea that we want full control over our OS, rather than it having full control of us, is a bad thing. Also, the idea that we should not strive too hard to copy the ideas of someone else is a bad thing. I can definitely see the point in not avoiding lawsuits or stale, cheap imitations or accusations that we're just copying off of somebody else. I completely understand now that the first Model T was the penultimate in cars because it was made by professionals, and we should never have made cars which were different.

*exhaling*

Okay, rant over. I guess I'm just not sure what you mean by keeping a clean filesystem. Please to elaborate, so that I may investigate its feasability. No seriously, I need something to do.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1)

Serious Callers Only (1022605) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210951)

* /Preferences - standard place for apps to store their user specific settings instead of hidden . files in the main user home directory


I would have thought this was fairly self-explanatory.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1)

Vorpix (60341) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211081)

i think by clean filesystem, he's just referring to having self contained applications and a unified, standard place to store preferences. which certainly seems cleaner to me than having applications in several places, their config files in another place, their preferences in another place..etc.

Cleaner doesn't always equate to better, though, and I think a lot of people are happy with things the way they are. The truth is, if you came in and reorganized my desk, it sure might look a lot nicer to passersby but I will have a hell of a hard time finding anything.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (3, Interesting)

johannesg (664142) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211297)

But I have to ask the obvious question here: In just what way does Linux NOT have a clean filesystem?

In the way that files that belong to applications are spread over a dozen directories. To name just one example: why is it considered a good idea to have a single directory with all the help files for everything that is installed? Just put them in the application directory already. It reduces the chances of having naming clashes with files that are already there, and it would allow installation and de-installation using nothing more than drag and drop instead of the elaborate scripting systems now in place. It would also make it far easier to understand what specific files do: if you now find a file, let's say /etc/y13f4, and assuming for a moment that there is nothing on your system even remotely called "y13f4", would you know what it is for or who put it there? If every application was well-behaved and stored that file in $appdir/etc/ it would be utterly clear to everyone that it was part of that specific application. And then there is security: access to files in /etc and other directories could be far more limited than it is today, since no applications would have any business sticking their files there.

And let's have a look how Windows does it: every application writes a bunch of crap into the registry, and everyone is moaning about it. Yet when it is UNIX doing it it is fine? That really doesn't make ANY sense.

Yes, the idea that we want full control over our OS, rather than it having full control of us, is a bad thing.

I cannot image where that came from. Are you sure you were even replying to my post?

Also, the idea that we should not strive too hard to copy the ideas of someone else is a bad thing. I can definitely see the point in not avoiding lawsuits or stale, cheap imitations or accusations that we're just copying off of somebody else.

There are really only two models for storing applications: store everything related to the application together in one folder (the model used by Commodore and Apple), or to store everything all over the filesystem (the model used by UNIX and Windows). So you get to be like Windows, or you get to be like Apple. On that basis I would strongly prefer to be more like Apple - even when discounting the advantages of that model.

I completely understand now that the first Model T was the penultimate in cars because it was made by professionals, and we should never have made cars which were different.

But you do believe we should stick with the original UNIX model of storing files all over the place? I guess you must: you are violently attacking me when I support a proposed change to the original model.

My alternative theory is that you urgently need to take some more medication.

Okay, rant over. I guess I'm just not sure what you mean by keeping a clean filesystem. Please to elaborate, so that I may investigate its feasability. No seriously, I need something to do.

Oh, NOW I see: you are the person in charge of development over at Ubuntu! Sorry, I had no idea! Well, it is really simple. The original poster would like to see a system whereby applications don't write crap all over the /etc, /var, /lib, /usr, /usr/lib, /var/log, and whereever you stick manfiles these days. Instead he would like to store ALL THAT SHIT in one directory (per application, of course). Wouldn't that be neat? Moreover, I support that position: it would be extremely neat.

Of course, I realize this represents a Change From The Way Things Were. I understand the fear and uncertainty ANY change causes. Really! But rather than simply be an uber-arrogant asshole and say "rejected" without ANY consideration or discussion of the merits of the stated idea, we could and should have had a civilized discussion why this is good or bad.

Your baseless flaming of me, mostly based on statements that I did not actually make but only occurred in your head, unfortunately rules out that possibility. Too bad, but maybe we can try again in three years or so...

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (4, Insightful)

DaleGlass (1068434) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211591)

In the way that files that belong to applications are spread over a dozen directories. To name just one example: why is it considered a good idea to have a single directory with all the help files for everything that is installed? Just put them in the application directory already.

That's because the Linux filesystem layout comes from Unix, and that was made to be optimal for system administration. Meaning, having part of the filesystem be shared through NFS. /etc, /bin, /sbin and /lib are needed for the system to boot. /usr may be mounted from a share, and can be readonly.

The different locations for binaries, settings, etc, makes it very easy to share data between a hundred boxes, but not the configuration, or the configuration as well if you want it.

Even if you don't need a network, this is still nice for system administration. For example my general layout is root FS on plain RAID-1, then /usr, /var and /home mounted from LVM. This ensures that even if LVM gets messed up somehow, the box still boots, and in fact it boots from any surviving drive since it's a software RAID-1. Since a functional system is already in place, recovery is much easier.

But you do believe we should stick with the original UNIX model of storing files all over the place? I guess you must: you are violently attacking me when I support a proposed change to the original model.

The thing is that you don't understand the original model. You seem to think that the layout is the way it is because people just threw stuff into the first place they could think of. Learn why it's the way it is, then come up with a good reason why the original reasons are no longer good, and only then there can be a sensible discussion of the subject.

Of course, I realize this represents a Change From The Way Things Were. I understand the fear and uncertainty ANY change causes. Really! But rather than simply be an uber-arrogant asshole and say "rejected" without ANY consideration or discussion of the merits of the stated idea, we could and should have had a civilized discussion why this is good or bad.

If I wanted OS X, I'd use OS X. Your idea isn't new, and has been discussed hundreds of times before. That Ubuntu still keeps the old layout should be a hint.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21211755)

Fuck you. No honestly, the rest of the computing world say FUCK YOU.

The computing world has been waiting for Linux to get its shit together so we can move on to a standard open platform and dimwitted juvenile punks like you keep screwing things up.

How much would it cost to pay you to just go the fuck away?

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1)

domatic (1128127) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211779)

Here's a hint: Only "dimwitted juvenile punks" use such language in response to polite reasoned posts.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21212037)

Now, now, children! Here, have a fork!

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21211667)

Ok. I support most of this. But please...

DON'T TOUCH /var/log/

Having all the logs in just one place is great.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (2, Informative)

Warui Kami (104676) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211783)

This $appdir/ setup you mention was done in UNIX-style OSes once upon a time (and still is), and every one of these $appdirs was kept in one place: /opt.

I have a .profile I used on Solaris machines for something like ten years that had several for loops for setting up the $PATH, $MANPATH, $LD_LIBRARY_PATH, and so on, by looping through /opt/*/{bin,man,lib}. While the /opt setup has certain advantages of separation of applications from each other, it creates a messy operating environment. You have a list of applications (`ls /opt`) and can uninstall any of them (`rm -rf /opt/$app`) using standard file management tools. Package management provides these advantages of /opt, by giving you a list (in synaptic, dselect, `rpm -qa`, etc.) without the disadvantage of having a 5k $PATH. If you compile your own software and are too lazy to create a package, you install into an area meant for that (/usr/local) most of the time. Admittedly on systems with net-mounted /usr, /usr/local has another purpose, but we can safely ignore that in 99% of cases, as the two are not incompatible.

One of my housemates built a linux system that relied on loopback fs images, mounted and combined with unionfs. He had basic packages that would be loaded into the unionfs, and the file trees merged. Then, the only files on the only rw branch of the union were config files he had changed, and his home directory. It was an absolutely fascinating system, and there were scripts for hot-loading new packages, with some restrictions on unloading due to the nature of unionfs (which he had hacked the kernel to get this functionality). When he started talking about creating a package manager, the discussion really ended with us saying he had just changed where the abstraction level of standard package managers was and the only real advantage was that altered files were in a separate filesystem, and easily sorted through. All the other advantages of the system are the same as in, for example, debian. You don't need to touch any files, or know where they'll be, to install OO.o, you just install the package, and everything is interleaved into your filesystem for you.

Naively creating a /Applications directory and thinking it will make everything better and easier ignores the vibrant history of UNIX. I wish more people would learn how and why modern package management came about. It is incredibly powerful, and one of the things that Linux systems have over Windows, rather than vice versa. The 'Add and Remove Programs' control panel is a cheap imitation, and per-program installers a serious downside to the platform.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 6 years ago | (#21212057)

"There are really only two models for storing applications: store everything related to the application together in one folder (the model used by Commodore and Apple)"
The Amiga often stored files in the lib directory. Well library files anyway.
I actually think that that Linux's / Unix's file structure is a huge mess. It has mutated over the years and I just don't like it.
OS/Xs is actually an interesting idea And I think there is a Linux type system that uses something like that.
But the /Preferences idea does make me stop and thing. How do yo deal with user specific settings? I have not used OS/X much at all so I don't know.
Do they have sub-directories like /Preferences/USER ?
And then you have the idea of why not store the preferences in a database like SQLLite? The downside would be that you could corrupt all your settings if the database went south but it would allow an easy way to have nested preferences.

The real reason that Linux isn't going to go that way is because of inertia. There is already too many programs that will not work that way. What you will have is an even bigger mess.

That is one of the many reasons why I am more than a little sad that Windows and Linux have pretty much killed new ideas in OS design.
I doubt that we will see a clean sheet of paper OS for the desktop or server space for a very long time.
I don't think anybody wants to toss away all those working applications anytime soon.
Pretty much the same reason we are stuck with Windows, and X-Windows. Because they work.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21210903)

Thankfully the world is changed and moved forward by people other than twats sniping at each other in a web forum. I don't want either one of you guys making design decisions for my OS.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1, Informative)

m2943 (1140797) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211699)

Have you even considered the proposals on their own merits? Keeping a clean filesystem is a noble goal, and definitely worth considering.

OS X's file system is no "cleaner" than Ubuntu's. Furthermore, OS X fails to conform to standard UNIX file system conventions.

Oh, and that attitude of yours is what I consider to be the *PRIMARY* thing that's wrong with Linux. But I guess it will be hard to fix as well...

That attitude of yours is what I consider to be the *PRIMARY* thing that's wrong with OS X.

In fact, there are many aspects of OS X that positively suck. You named some of them. Linux may need to imitate some aspects of Windows that suck simply because of the predominance of Windows in the market, but OS X's market share is so insignificant that the only features of OS X that are worth adopting in Linux are the ones that demonstrably are better than what Linux already has. File system organization, installers, and GUI designers are not among those.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (2, Insightful)

freezin fat guy (713417) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211963)

Oh, and that attitude of yours is what I consider to be the *PRIMARY* thing that's wrong with Linux. But I guess it will be hard to fix as well...

Ahem, "that attitude" is not a bug - it's a feature

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21212067)

What is your primary complaint again? That Linux users are too happy with Linux? Or is it that Linux users aren't receptive to doing things your way all the time?

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21210635)

Linux on the desktop.

Rejected

Still feeling smug ericrost you fucking little punk?

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (0, Troll)

Rocketship Underpant (804162) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210453)

I'm quite surprised... someone in the Linux world finally gets it! I gave up Linux for OS X a long time ago, but it would be nice to see some flavour of Linux adopt a sensible, user-friendly way of installing software.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1)

PrescriptionWarning (932687) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210525)

Installing software via Ubuntu's Add/Remove app is the greatest thing, way better than dragging to install. I still can't figure out how to uninstall some of my OSX apps that were installed into the control panel instead of in the apps folder :P

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1)

Gryle (933382) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210611)

...it would be nice to see some flavour of Linux adopt a sensible, user-friendly way of installing software.
For Debian-based systems in GNOME, open the Synaptic Package Manager, find the software you want and mark it for installation. The Manager will even find and install the necessary dependencies. There's also KDE version known as Kynaptic. In Ubuntu, there's an "Add/Remove" program under the Applications menu that functions the same way, except with pretty pictures. I'm really not how much more sensible and user-friendly software installation can get.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1)

sammyF70 (1154563) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210807)

indeed. And installing of .deb packages is just one click away, generally with less hassle than installing software in windows.

I love those "I switched away from Linux to [insert commercial OS here] a long time ago"-posts. Ubuntu has made more progress toward useability in the last 12 month than any other OS I know of. If you tried some linux distro over a year ago, and never bothered again after that, then you don't have any clue about the state of Linux today.

Hell ... I even think Ubuntu is so user-friendly that I installed it on an old laptop for my 65 year old mom, and guess what : she is coping very well despite having only used windows and occasionally macs so far.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (2, Insightful)

baldass_newbie (136609) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211093)

Ubuntu has made more progress toward useability in the last 12 month than any other OS I know of.

You could say that's because they had more ground to cover, but they still lag (Gnome, KDE or Enlightenment.) Package handling is still an issue and NOTHING is easier than the OS X drag and drop. Synaptic is nice. Very nice. Best thing I've seen in Linux since pkginstall on Slack.

I also disagree with your '12 month' assessment. The big strides take longer and are an accumulation. Perhaps you've just come to realize some functionality, but a lot of it has been there in one form or another all along. I've seen no great leap in the last year that I could point to re:usability. And yes, I'm writing this from a Linux b0x3n.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1)

sammyF70 (1154563) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211447)

Drag and Drop is nice ... though I prefer Synaptic's search and install functionality. The fact that Synaptic automatically checks for updates for all the software packages I installed is a very nice and appreciated touch too.
The 12 month thing was not really about the package management though. I first tried Ubuntu 6.04 (after a short SUSE Intermezzo or 7 years ago), and it was interesting but painful. I liked it still, but it was more the geek in me than anything else. Never got my sound to work right, setting up a dual head system was a nightmare, various peripherals just didn't work and Gnome or KDE (tried both) seemed particularly unstable and cumbersome to use. I had it as dual boot, but rarely used it I tried 6.10 after that, which was better, but still more a geek thing than anything else. It didn't last long on my drive.
Then came 7.04, and that was again quite an improvement. It worked nearly out of the box (still some problems setting up the dual display, but nowhere near the troubles I had had on the prvious versions), Gnome actually felt like a real GUI and was stable, and performance-wise there was nothing I could complain about. I even got Flash and Dreamweaver, both of which I need for work, to run in wine. I still had XP installed, but gave the majority of my drive space to Linux, and, I now only boot windows when I want to play some new games (you know .. like the one with the cake :P
7.10 wasn't THAT much of an improvement over 7.04, mostly eye-candy with the inclusion of compiz-fusion, and they screwed up badly with the removal of the audio-preview (just install esound and it works again. You just shouldn't need to do that though)
As it is now, Ubuntu is a valid alternative to the ~big~ OS for pretty much everybody, as long as you're not forced to use some proprietary software that will only run in a specific environment. When 6.04 came out, this just wasn't the case.

I'll admit .. That's 18 months, and not 12 ... but still ...

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21212035)

"NOTHING is easier than the OS X drag and drop"


Wrong. Ubuntu is far easier than OS X. With macs, you first have to FIND the package somewhere, download it (assuming it is available by download), then drag it. What a hassle. With ubuntu, you just select it from a list of available software and click on it. Done. Oh, and with Ubuntu when that app is updated, the update can be applied automatically, again something OS X doesn't do.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21212021)

indeed. And installing of .deb packages is just one click away, generally with less hassle than installing software in windows.
Not to mention that with Ubuntu all applications automatically get updated, unlike Windows and OS X where every app phones home to look for updates. Package management is why I switched to Ubuntu from Fedora. Everything I need is there and everything just works. The only tweaking I have to do is to get rid of the baby poop colors (Clearlooks+Tango ftw!). Plus, the Ubuntu desktop is far more consistent, which is a big plus.

I love those "I switched away from Linux to [insert commercial OS here] a long time ago"-posts. Ubuntu has made more progress toward useability in the last 12 month than any other OS I know of.
For my usage, at least, Ubuntu is easier to use than OS X. For example, I need apache2, php5, and mysql. Under Ubuntu all I have to do is install a few packages through synaptic (apache2, libapache2-mod-php5, php5-cli, php5-mysql, mysql-client and mysql-server) and I'm good to go.

Under Leopard (fully clean install, all partitions were deleted before running the installer). I installed Xcode and MacPorts and then spent the last two days trying to get it all to actually compile. I ran "sudo port install php5 +apache2 +mysql" like the site said, but then it failed when compiling db44. Now after running "sudo port clean php5" and trying again, everything says "compiler cannot create executables". Completely removing and reinstalling both Xcode and MacPorts several times has not fixed the error. Manually compiling a simple "hello world" app works. Last night I just went "fuck it" and went back* to dual booting with Ubuntu on my PowerBook (virtualization is not an option as it's PowerPC).

I hate compiling software from source. It's something I never have to do with Ubuntu.

* Just as a note, my main desktop (Core 2 Duo E7700, 4GB ram, self built) runs Ubuntu and always has. I was just trying to go only Leopard with my PowerBook. I only did that with Tiger for about a year before Fink pissed me off to the point where I wanted to start smashing things and just went the dual boot route.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1)

baadger (764884) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210695)

> App resources all contained in the .app directory structure instead of scattered all over the file system

This is a fucking terrible idea. The Linux/*nix file system layout IS CLEAN.

All your user apps are in /usr/bin, what is wrong with that?
All your user libraries are in /usr/lib, what is wrong with that?
All your library/executable hybrids (stuff that can function as either), is in /usr/libexec, what is wrong with that?

If you shove everything in an "/App" dir you're going to end up with a massive symlink fiasco so all your apps can find shared libraries. Or do you want to do away with shared libraries?

In fact the only thing I agree with you on is that config files should be put in your home directory in a more structured manner, along the lines of the rest of the well structured / file system.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21212135)

Basically, it's an issue so-called "Power Users" (particularly from Windows) have with Linux systems. Many of them have a tendancy to micro-manage everything, such as where programs are installed. They're not content to let the OS do what it was designed to do - managing the computer for you.

The Linux way is fine if you don't care where things are installed. I've been using Linux for years, and I simply stoped caring about anything outside of /home after a few months. On my home machine, I've not looked outside of /home since I installed the current distro about a year ago. Then again, I don't care about anything outside of /Users on Mac OS X, or anything outside of C:\Documents and Settings (C:\Users on Vista) on Windows. I know many people who just can't leave the filesystem alone, and until I started using Linux I was one of them - bad habits picked up from dumb operating systems (AmigaOS, DOS, and Windows 3.1 / 9x in my case, Mac OS 9 for others) that require you to micro-manage everything.

Oh, Mac apps tend to use local copies of any shared libraries not included in a base Mac OS X install. All the overhead of shared libraries, with none of the benefits. Most Windows programs are moving that way too - only Microsoft-supplied libraries are ever shared between programs, and even then only if they're installed as a separate product (IE and .NET). Everything else, from the C / C++ runtime, through the GDI+ libraries, are all shipped separately with each app.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (3, Insightful)

gclef (96311) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210721)

There's one problem with this: Patches. One of the truly lovely things about a package manager is that it becomes your one-stop place for patches to all applications on the system. Once you leave the package manager, and have users dumping .app files randomly onto their system, you have no good way of getting patches for those apps. This dramatically weakens the security of your system.

I can see wanting a way for little userland apps (that are unlikely to ever get patches anyway) to install in for just one user. But for big, system-wide things (like a browser, or OOo) a free-for-all /Application directory is a really bad idea.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1)

fast penguin (910736) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211627)

You are not thinking outside the box. When you run one of these self-contained applications, it could register itself, so the system can e.g. add a mime-type handle entry for it. It will then unregister and its stuff clean up on removal. The same system could work for some centralized patching system.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1)

gclef (96311) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211801)

According to the earlier post, removal of an app is as simple as deleting a folder, and addition is as simple as dropping a set of files into a folder. The only way to satisfy this is to have a bunch of API hooks that run when you move files around, which is truly ugly.

Also, I don't think I want applications specifying their own patch sources. Large organizations *certainly* *don't* want their applications specifying their own patch sources.

In the end, this is about control of software installation: where does it reside? For folks that just use their systems in a home, you want the end user to have that control. For people trying to manage hundreds of them at a time (which I do), you really don't want the end user to have that control - you want it centrally managed. Apple has come down squarely on the home user side, and Ubuntu is trying to walk the tightrope between the two. What's "better" depends on where you sit.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1)

argiedot (1035754) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210931)

I don't understand what you'd hope to achieve by [1], why not just keep 'where the program is' out of the list of things for the user to worry about? I fail to see the advantage that putting everything in one .app installation file gives, from a layman's point of view (I don't code, or design). What difference does [3] make, really? Unless you have a lot of non-config dot folders in your home folder I can't see why you'd be bothered with that. OS X is pretty, I'll admit that, but GNOME has been just fine for me so far, but I admit I have no idea what "An app interface building tool that has OS X level UI element default spacing" is but maybe Glade is of some use?

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1)

argiedot (1035754) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210971)

That wasn't supposed to all go in one paragraph. Something ate my newlines, and I have no clue how so many buts in that last sentence. Sorry, that's a lesson learnt about Preview.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21210973)

<sarcasm>

* switch binaries to PE executables with .exe file extension

* change directory delimiter from / to \

* identify partitions with a single-letter name followed by a colon, before the file path

* change "home" to "Documents and Settings"

* move applications to "Program Files" folder

* replace symlinks with "shortcuts" with a .lnk file extension, which point to the linked file only when double-clicking it in the file browser, and cannot be used as a "virtual" file

* ignore bugs

</sarcasm>

Screw That - We Need Hasslefree Wifi With WPA PSK (1)

theshowmecanuck (703852) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211291)

It needs to allow the use of any mainstream Wifi chip set. Otherwise it will remain on the fringe. Hard wired connections to the internet are going away and people don't want to learn about chipsets and pull open packages at the store to see if the 'right one' is on the wireless card they want to buy. And if they can't figure out how to make native drivers work, they need to add a fool proof (read drag and drop easy) way of adding the windows drivers to the system. Without having to manually edit config files.

I would also suggest it allow you to install dual boot on a system with sata raid and running windows. I want it to recognize the raid and install on the partition I set up without screwing around. (Hey propeller head, I don't want to hear about how windows sata raid is fake... I don't give a shit... on windows I have a raid array and want to install Linux. If you don't want me or anyone with 'fake' raid to try out Linux, keep up the current attitude and stay in the fringe.)

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (2, Insightful)

tuffy (10202) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211535)

* /Preferences - standard place for apps to store their user specific settings instead of hidden . files in the main user home directory

Which user? One could expand it to /Preferences/user1/settings and so forth, but how is that better than /home/user1/.settings ? Having all the .settings files in a home directory means that backing up, restoring and transferring /home saves all those files at the same time. Thus, it is less fragile than storing them anywhere else.

In short, /Preferences is a stupid idea.

OS X is a bad model (1)

m2943 (1140797) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211631)

Application bundles - drag and drop install, removal. /Application directory

Software installation and uninstallation is a mess on OS X: some applications are drag-and-drop, others use an installer. There is no standard way of uninstalling software, no way of figuring out what modifications a piece of software made, and no way of tracking dependencies.

/Preferences - standard place for apps to store their user specific settings instead of hidden . files in the main user home directory

OS X applications don't store preferences in /Preferences, they store it in a messy hierarchy in ~/Library. Just think of .something as ~/Library/.../something.

An app interface building tool that has OS X level UI element default spacing when laying out an interface to help with the jarringly hideous problems virtually every Linux app has with visual layout

I think that's just what you're used to. Personally, I don't particularly like OS X layout, and XCode's GUI builder is a nightmare.

Ubuntu is imitating some of the good parts of OS X: simplicity, nice visual effects, etc. But Ubuntu's underlying technologies--installers, runtimes, libraries, window management, etc.--are superior to Apple's.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (4, Informative)

EsbenMoseHansen (731150) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211681)

* Application bundles - drag and drop install, removal. Ability to drag an .app to anywhere in the file system at any time. App resources all contained in the .app directory structure instead of scattered all over the file system
We have this. It's called "deb packages". Works like a charm.

* /Application directory - default place for App bundles to be copied to
You mean /application... no need to use capitals. Anyway, I don't see the advantage over the current system. I don't really care where packages are stored, that is my package manager's job. Oh

* /Preferences - standard place for apps to store their user specific settings instead of hidden . files in the main user home directory
You mean /preferences :p Anyway, that sounds like a horrible idea. Cleanup after users would get more messy and quotas too. But putting them under ~/.prefs/... might not be a bad idea. There is some merit there, but not an easy thing to change!

* An app interface building tool that has OS X level UI element default spacing when laying out an interface to help with the jarringly hideous problems virtually every Linux app has with visual layo
Hmm..I think OSX apps looks terrible, while KDE apps are the cleanest. But all three are quite usable, so I don't see this as a priority. And technically, it isn't the interface building tool's job to layout widgets, that would be horrible! Just imagine what happens when the font changes, or the resolution.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1)

ealar dlanvuli (523604) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211685)

I 100% agree. /usr is a complete mess that only made sense 10 years ago. Though I'd really prefer not to see osx style "no shared libraries - everyone uses their own." I rather like the efficiency of shared libraries.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List (1)

itzdandy (183397) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211697)

this could be handled with a FUSE module pretty easy! have a list of acceptable config files to use tucked away in "fuse-configurator's" settings and have it mount all the acceptable config files that exsist in ~/ to /home/username/Settings. the list is so that some random . file isnt put in the Settings directory.

How about fixing things... (2, Insightful)

tttonyyy (726776) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210297)

...as well as adding new features?

'oops' proxy, for example. Worked great under other Debs distros, but kept crashing under FF. Left out of GG altogether.

Re:How about fixing things... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21210375)

You know, you could always help us. If you want it in, spend an hour of your day making it a package and submit it. Or, just get the upstream developer who's writing it/packaging it to submit it to Ubuntu. It's not that hard of a process, really.

Re:How about fixing things... (3, Informative)

JediTrainer (314273) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210785)

Hear hear. I'd particularly like the regressions addressed - the latest upgrade broke my installation of Eclipse so I can't run Ant inside it [launchpad.net]

Yes, the workaround is to either download/install Eclipse manually or run Ant from the command-line, but it is annoying to see a basic feature still broken for weeks when it worked perfectly fine before.

Re:How about fixing things... (3, Informative)

haeger (85819) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211225)

Yeah.
Gutsy broke my vmware. Not expected and from what I hear there's no vmware in gutsy still. We who have technical know-how can still fix it, but it does seem that the QA-dept slipped a bit on Gutsy.

.haeger

Re:How about fixing things... (3, Informative)

nhaines (622289) | more than 6 years ago | (#21212061)

Ubuntu 7.10 didn't "break" your copy of VMware server. Every time you change your kernel, you need to recompile the kernel modules for VMware. VMware provided kernel modules for Ubuntu 7.04's updates. Currently they do not provide kernel modules for 7.10. They will probably begin providing these updates within a few weeks.

In the meantime, you just have to compile your own modules. It's very simple--it's a matter of running vmware-config.pl every time you upgrade the kernel, which will automatically take care of everything for you as long as you have build-essential installed.

As annoying as this is (and I find it mildly annoying, at least), it is the price of using a proprietary solution like VMware instead of similar Free solutions (like QEMU or VirtualBox).

Re:How about fixing things... (1)

blazerw11 (68928) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211075)

Or, maybe, oops proxy has been abandoned for 4 years and doesn't work very well today. Last official release was Nov. 21, 2003. oops! downloads [paco.net].

rock-solid LTS (2)

noshellswill (598066) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210307)

For me, DAPPERx64 has been a rock-solid production box OS. It's hit a sweet-spot of automagic admin and *nix flexibility, stepping ahead of the M$ product. The revolution is over and the good-guys won. From HH I expect no amazement, just the next-step-up.

Looking at the release schedule (3, Interesting)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210353)

It'll be a while for before Hardy Heron is Hardly Hereyet (*bada bum*!) But seriously, I'd like to see some big improvements in Gnome file management. Much of this could be done with pre-configured custom Nautilus actions, but where Nautilus could use some help:

  • Recursive file permissions and ownership changes: Nautilus' interface for this clunky and doesn't work right.
  • Directory compare & synchronization: sync two folders by content. Yes, I know there are tools for this, but most of them are too difficult for the average user to setup and use.
  • Easy interface for massive file renames by pattern matching. See the support for this in Total Commander. Really easy.
  • Install the GNOME GPG frontend by default. (is this already in Gutsy?)


  • Other stuff I'd like to see:

  • Support for ext3 extended attributes and ACLs turned on by default.
  • An easy interface for installing QEMU and Windows like QEMU Launcher and QEMU Control polished and fully supported by Canonical.
  • LVM and RAID supported in the graphical installer. C'mon, guys, LOTS of people use RAID and LVM, especially now that most new computers have an integrated SATA RAID controller!

Re:Looking at the release schedule (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21210539)

So why don't you try Fedora that has almost all the stuff you ask for and does most of the development anyway ?
SCNR

Re:Looking at the release schedule (2, Informative)

baadger (764884) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210899)

Recursive file permissions and ownership changes: Nautilus' interface for this clunky and doesn't work right.

Yeah, and their current permissions tab on the folder/file properties dialog which was introduced in 2.18 (I think), made the whole dialog a whole lot taller. It's pretty ugly.

Directory compare & synchronization: sync two folders by content. Yes, I know there are tools for this, but most of them are too difficult for the average user to setup and use.

This is a good idea, in fact I'd be happy if instead of saying

A file named "morgan.jpg" already exists. Do you want to replace it?
it said

A file named "morgan.jpg" already exists, but the files are the same
and then gave me some options.

Easy interface for massive file renames by pattern matching.
I think it'd be great if there was a way to sequentially number files using rename (Windows Explorer has this) or to mass change extensions, but anything more complex should resort to the command line. Perhaps with some easier to use command line renaming tools, like "chgext" or something.

An easy interface for installing QEMU and Windows like QEMU Launcher and QEMU Control polished and fully supported by Canonical.

Try VirtualBox, it'll blow you away :-)

Why don't they remove mono? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21210389)

The inclusion of that more than anything leaves ubuntu open to patent threats and is why I recommend xubuntu even to new users. Is anyone really going to miss the stupid sticky note or photo apps in the default install?

Re:Why don't they remove mono? (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210477)

The inclusion of that more than anything leaves ubuntu open to patent threats
Says who? Microsoft actively supports the Mono and Moonlight developers. If they tried to sue over Mono or Moonlight, they'd have a lot of problems with standing to sue, due to failure to mitigate their own damages.

please get your facts straight (2, Insightful)

m2943 (1140797) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211805)

Is anyone really going to miss the stupid sticky note or photo apps in the default install?

In fact, in the default install, there are no Microsoft libraries installed with Mono. All that is installed is ECMA C# and the various Gnome-C# bindings. Those are no more susceptible to patent threats from Microsoft or anybody else than gcc, Gnome, or KDE.

And, yes, people use f-spot and Banshee.

The inclusion of that more than anything leaves ubuntu open to patent threats

Why don't they remove C, C++, Objective-C, Firefox, Ext3, Java, Compiz, and the entire Linux kernel while they are at it? All of those are potentially threatened by patents, from Microsoft, Apple, Sun, and lots of other companies.

Hardy Heron? Better adjective needed (1)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210421)

Given the way Linux users look at the Vista users, Haughty Heron might be more appropriate. Given the higher security of Linux, it could be Hardened Heron too. Given the cryptic command lines preferred by the unixy people, it could be Hackneyed Heron. Given the effect it is having on Redmond, it could be Haunting Heron.

Re:Hardy Heron? Better adjective needed (1)

The Assistant (1162547) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210479)

You forgot to mention Heroic Heron, for those looking for something that will be secure, capable, and consistent without being too bloaty, or overly questioning!

Re:Hardy Heron? Better adjective needed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21211907)

I don't know what shell you're using, but mine isn't hackneyed [reference.com] at all.

Hey - This Ubuntu Thing Sounds High Quality! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21210685)

The developers were also asking each other why Ubuntu hasn't seen wider adoption in the corporate world.

Someone replied 'Warty Warthog, Breezy Badger, Dapper Drake, Edgy Eft, Feisty Fawn and Gutsy Gibbon. Oh, and Hardy Heron.'

Then Incredulous Ibex, probably, and no doubt followed by Judgemental Jackal.

Experiences (5, Interesting)

PinkyDead (862370) | more than 6 years ago | (#21210707)

If I was asked what things annoyed me most about Feisty (Offtopic?!), I would have said two things: Printers and all that stuff you needed Automatix for. Everything else was pretty much fine.

Along comes Gutsy and... Printers, wow! - doesn't get easier, and Automatix? I've been using Gutsy for about 2 months now and I still haven't downloaded Automatix (Sorry guys, great tool - but don't need it anymore)

Gutsy brings Ubuntu to a level where it can really stand up against the likes of Windows (even coming out better in a lot of surveys than Vista). Compiz is incredible - and anyone I know with Windows stands open-mouthed when they see it.

Heron really needs to up the level way beyond what it is at now, and become the Windows Slayer. I have no idea how they would do that though.

Re:Experiences (1)

dave420 (699308) | more than 6 years ago | (#21212113)

It needs to run all the software people run on Windows, and support all the hardware Windows does. That has to be achieved before it can topple Vista. It could happen, but I fear by the time it's achieved that, new software and hardware will have been released which it needs to support. It's a game of cat and mouse, and I don't see how it can win, which sucks.

Bad name (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21210777)

They should have named it Horny Housewife

Hm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21210869)

I didn't realize that the logo changed to that red swirly thing.

Agenda item (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21210923)

Number one on the agenda: Find a way to "relieve" the naming committee of their distro naming duties.

"Gutsy Gibbon"? "Hardy Heron"?

I can barely tolerate "Tiger" and "Leopard."

Re:Agenda item (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21212165)

Yes, because having anything resembling personality or character just gives your monotony-riddled apple-worshiping mind a big headache.

Are they planning to fix the most appaling issue? (2, Funny)

ceeam (39911) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211029)

Are they gonna start regarding KDE as first-class citizen? 'Cos Gutsy Kubuntu is a joke. And GNOME IMO is totally evil.

You know, after using Kubuntu for quite a long time and recently having played with PCLinuxOS I think I understand now why it has moved to #1 at Distrowatch. It rightly deserves the spot.

Re:Are they planning to fix the most appaling issu (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21211261)

KDE sucks. If you want to make a distro a "full class citizen" pick Xubuntu. KDE is just plain ugly and too "gadgety". For a power user a graphical environment is there to facilitate the quick launch of programs and other very routine tasks.. for anything else there's the command line.

And, why don't you just use PCLinuxOS? Oh, and Distrowatch's metrics (or lack thereof) are fucked anyway.

Re:Are they planning to fix the most appaling issu (1)

ceeam (39911) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211363)

You don't understand, do you? KDE is first and foremost the API to develop consistent desktop apps. KDE4 will also include unified multimedia system and that would be the only thing rivaling Windows + DirectX (and of course, surpassing it). Comparing KDE to your launcher of choice is like comparing MS Windows to TotalCommander or something. And, KDE is not ugly in my opinion at all (unless you have a poor choice of widget theme and window decoration), I think it's really, really nice with Polyester + Crystal, for example.

"F"-release... (0)

DonCarlos (222830) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211079)

Well, I can't wait to see what the "F" release be named after ;)

Re:"F"-release... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21211259)

Already been named. "Feisty Fawn"

robustness? (1)

matang (731781) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211235)

i hope "robustness" translates to "apps start working more consistently". the first install i blamed on my penchant for playing around with installs/configs too much, but the next two i did i left basically "as-is" and i have to restart the machines at least once a day for various issues: evolution stops showing incoming mail, gdesklets has never worked correctly on my x64 system, wireless card on my laptop periodically stops responding, and a host of other issues that usually start as an app not functioning then cascades into chaos. bsod vs wsonsuiaw (white screen of nothing showing up in a window). just sayin'.

Kubuntu too? (2, Informative)

joeslugg (8092) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211443)

In TFA and in another posted summary that had more details, the focus (expectedly) is on standard Ubuntu. I'm just wondering if anyone knows if and how much focus and time is put on improving Kubuntu as well? I read things about improvements to GUI tools and apps, and it's always Gnome/GTK related. Are the KDE/Qt counterparts getting attention as well?

(Please, no flame wars on Gnome v. KDE - it's just my preference and you have yours.)

Hmm, I should go try their forums too...

Let them fix hdparm ! (1)

ericdujardin (623023) | more than 6 years ago | (#21211913)

If only they could fix the hdparm issue... Since 7.04 IDE disks are mounted through scsi emulation, hence they cannot be tuned any longer... I just hope they can fix that for a "stable" release.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...