Ubuntu 20.04 LTS Likely To Ship With Linux 5.4 As Opposed To 5.5

[tjaalton]

Is...Are you...Really? REALLY?!?!?

no, at least the kernels since 16.04 ship the xpad module..

[L_A_G]

no, at least the kernels since 16.04 ship the xpad module..

Maybe versions newer than 16.04 have shipped with it, but I remember using 16.04 and having to not only compile it from source, but also have to load it up with modprobe after every reboot (there probably was a more elegant way to do it). That was when I decided that despite all of the useful out-of-mainline wireless device drivers Canonical adds to their kernels, I'm just going to use mainline kernels and pull in whatever out-of-mainline drivers I need on a case-by-case basis.

[schmidtbag]

So in other words you think it's reasonable to cause loads more issues for other people with something that's supposed to have as few of them as possible simply to support your personal extremely niche use case? Even when all you need to do is just wait for the next release and the two releases after that will also be suitable for your personal use case?

Uh... no? All I want is an option to get newer packages, as though this weren't LTS. Let's not be deliberately obtuse here, ok?

I don't like it when people throw around the term "entitled" willy-nilly like they do these days, but it's really the most accurate way I can describe your demands here.

How are they entitled when this situation is news-worthy enough for Michael to make a post about it? These LTS releases are this awkward middle-ground of slightly newer than the previous release but older than what a short-term release would normally have.
If you don't like to throw around such terms, maybe stop assuming the worst in people, eh?

If you think something that takes 5 minutes upon install is too tedious, then you probably shouldn't have bothered with the ARM laptop altogether as I'm sure you're going to run into many more issues that are even more tedious to fix than that one 5 minute task.

How are you not understanding the entire point here? Spending 5 minutes to install something in and of itself isn't that tedious when it's the only option. I got this laptop knowing it wasn't going to be quick and easy to set up. The gripe here is those 5 minutes could be so easily avoided if this wasn't an LTS release. Is it a big deal? No, but I never said it was either. It's just merely annoying, not rage inducing.
Think of it like this:
You're driving to a new place with plenty of time to spare on a hot summer day, but your phone suddenly shuts down because the GPS app made it overheat, so you have to pull out a paper map instead. You're still going to get there on time but it doesn't change the fact that something of your control just made your life unexpectedly more difficult, which is fair to be annoyed about, is it not?

[Joe Braga]

Why anybody utitilize Linux Distros Like OpenSuse Tumblemweed or Fedora that are rolling release/Bleeding Edge unlikely Debian Stable and Ubuntu LTS that these should be Fixed Release without packages freezing like OpenSuse Leap and CentOS

[starshipeleven]

Why anybody utitilize Linux Distros Like OpenSuse Tumblemweed or Fedora that are rolling release/Bleeding Edge unlikely Debian Stable and Ubuntu LTS that these should be Fixed Release without packages freezing like OpenSuse Leap and CentOS

.yes.

[L_A_G]

Uh... no? All I want is an option to get newer packages, as though this weren't LTS. Let's not be deliberately obtuse here, ok?

Brand new packages and LTS releases go together like orange juice and laundry detergent. It's obviously not going to be great for washing things and even worse as a beverage.

How are they entitled when this situation is news-worthy enough for Michael to make a post about it? These LTS releases are this awkward middle-ground of slightly newer than the previous release but older than what a short-term release would normally have.

Michael reports about all kinds of obscure things and they did consider using a kernel that wasn't really suited for an LTS release. Even then this story is less "Oh no, they didn't use a kernel" and more "Thankfully they came to their senses and didn't use a kernel not suited for the stability of LTS in an LTS release".

If you don't like to throw around such terms, maybe stop assuming the worst in people, eh?

An observation is not the same thing as an assumption and what I made was the former.

How are you not understanding the entire point here? Spending 5 minutes to install something in and of itself isn't that tedious when it's the only option. I got this laptop knowing it wasn't going to be quick and easy to set up. The gripe here is those 5 minutes could be so easily avoided if this wasn't an LTS release. Is it a big deal? No, but I never said it was either. It's just merely annoying, not rage inducing.

Sure it's annoying, but the cost of avoiding annoying a handful of people just isn't worth the unnecessary aggravation to a much larger group of people stemming from using a kernel release unfit for the task at hand.

LTS releases are for use cases where you care way more about stability than cutting edge features and to demand they undermine this is like demanding that car makers sell cars without airbags and seatbelts.

[schmidtbag]

Brand new packages and LTS releases go together like orange juice and laundry detergent. It's obviously not going to be great for washing things and even worse as a beverage.

Doesn't that contradict what you were saying about installing out-of-repo kernels?

Even then this story is less "Oh no, they didn't use a kernel" and more "Thankfully they came to their senses and didn't use a kernel not suited for the stability of LTS in an LTS release".

Which, despite what you think, is something I also agree with. LTS should be stable, not cutting-edge. But again: it's annoying when every other Ubuntu release has no cutting-edge repo.

An observation is not the same thing as an assumption and what I made was the former.

The semantics here are irrelevant. The point is you stated something subjective because you are choosing to take the willfully-ignorant and/or pessimistic approach to this discussion, and then judging me as a result.

Sure it's annoying, but the cost of avoiding annoying a handful of people just isn't worth the unnecessary aggravation to a much larger group of people stemming from using a kernel release unfit for the task at hand.

LTS releases are for use cases where you care way more about stability than cutting edge features and to demand they undermine this is like demanding that car makers sell cars without airbags and seatbelts.

I agree... nowhere did I say otherwise...

[sverris]

Yes, we understand it is LTS, but are you forgetting that there isn't yet another Ubuntu version with newer packages? Although I don't have any AMD hardware in need of the 5.5 or 5.6 kernel, I do have an ARM laptop that is. For people like myself, a kernel with more hardware functionality is more desirable than a kernel of unknown stability.

Normally I'd agree with you about just switching to another distro, but in my case, Arch doesn't work properly on my laptop.

You can always install the newest kernel from https://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/ if you so desire... (there even is a simple utility named 'ukuu' for this)

[DanL]

Ultimately, I think most users will be better off for this. Kernel release and distro release dates don't always line up smoothly, and it's better to play it safe for an LTS.

Well, if we want to look for an upside, this means that my old Nvidia 9400m laptop got a short extension how long the binary drivers will work.

It'll be 5 years if you're willing to use 20.04 for that long. I wouldn't call that short. Anyway, I think Ubuntu and other LTS distros probably would have been able to patch Nvidia 390 to work with newer kernels as long as the changes between kernel versions weren't too radical.

Release an LTS version once every 2 years, but offer a rolling release repository (kinda like Debian Sid) that is easy for users to switch to.

Yeah, I'd like that too, but it's not Ubuntu's way. IIRC, even Shuttleworth said that releases keep devs focused and are good practice. You can make Ubuntu into a sort of rolling release if you're willing to use the development version all the time, but as someone who has tried that, I'd say using Debian sid would be less painful.

[schmidtbag]

You can always install the newest kernel from https://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/ if you so desire... (there even is a simple utility named 'ukuu' for this)

I am aware of ~kernel-ppa though I've had repo syncing issues with it on ARM. I wasn't aware of ukuu. Thanks for the tip.