Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

An Ubuntu 22.04 LTS Fix Is Coming For A Very Annoying & Serious APT Problem

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by tildearrow View Post
    This is why Pacman and ZYpp are so much better.
    pacman will refuse to install in this situation, and Zypper asks you whether to replace dependencies, install anyway or not.
    Gentoo's portage/emerge will also refuse to remove needed software. It's my 2nd most favorite package manager, with the 1st place being Pacman + an AUR helper. I've given up on APT a while ago.

    Hiding settings behind a dpkg-reconfigure is super annoying, as it breaks with upstream's default behaviour and config file locations. Still having systemd wrap old sysvinit style services is cumbersome aswell and causes headaches when it doesn't behave properly.

    I always feel like I have to fight the distro when I want to customize deeper-level system stuff and manage settings, so anything Debian-based is a no-go for me.
    Last edited by kiffmet; 14 July 2022, 04:53 PM.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Sin2x View Post
      It did mean exactly that a decade ago. The quality of Ubuntu LTS releases (I shudder even to think about non-LTS releases) went steadily downhill from 18.04 at least.
      i was on kubuntu in the past so i can tell exatly the point in time it did go down... it was the moment microsoft invested money into Canonical.
      " It Almost Feels Like Microsoft Has Already ‘Bought’ Canonical"
      http://techrights.org/2020/07/06/canonical-mvp/
      "Ubuntu helps the E.E.E. Gone are the days when Ubuntu worked to actually replace Windows; it seems like Canonical is happy enough for it to just become a Vista 10 ‘feature’…"

      Phantom circuit Sequence Reducer Dyslexia

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Ironmask View Post
        Why does apt keep doing this.

        Everyone panicked when Linus did that "trying out linux for gaming" series and this happened, and were like "oh no now everyone will think this happens all the time!"

        IT DOES HAPPEN ALL THE TIME

        I have sworn off all apt-based distros years ago, it was the last straw for me.
        Apparently, Linus broke another Ubuntu install quite recently in a not-yet-released Short Circuit video. Maybe it was this bug?

        Or maybe Apt bugs manifest themselves whenever Linus touches an Ubuntu install, then they spread to everyone else :P

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Sin2x View Post

          Yep, and this is exactly what we have QA for. A concept that Canonical, apparently, deems obsolete.
          Ubuntu is for noobs. Works as intended.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by kiffmet View Post
            I always feel like I have to fight the distro when I want to customize deeper-level system stuff and manage settings, so anything Debian-based is a no-go for me.
            Maybe you're not the target audience. Pacman or portage is great for ricers. Ubuntu is mainly targeting enterprises and inexperienced users.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by ferry View Post
              I have libudev1 installed, on my many times upgraded Kubuntu (not a clean install). I don't see any issues like described so there must have been a way for apt to resolve this.
              Upgrading the whole system at once doesn't cause the problem. It's upgrading single packages that does it. It looks like they have a lot of dependencies on specific versions, and apt deals with that by uninstalling those packages.

              Comment


              • #37
                caligula If it only were like that. I used to really like the original Mandriva distro and from my subjective experience that, Fedora, OpenSUSE are much less of a headache than anything Debian, despite not having a focus on being extraordinarily accessible to ricers.

                They just have a simple philosophy: Don't add distro-specific quirks that alter established upstream behaviour, i.e. like the location of configuration files. They also don't come with abstractions that force people to use them (i.e. OpenSUSE has YaST, but one can just aswell change the same standard config files in /etc/ with a text editor, nothing is hidden, no underlying mechanisms are changed)
                Last edited by kiffmet; 14 July 2022, 07:38 PM. Reason: typos

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by bug77 View Post
                  I understand this is a bug from upstream, but still, Ubuntu was expected to test their distro before releasing. I wonder how this escaped, it's not like Ubuntu has a short preview/beta window...
                  It's a corner/niche case that Michael and a couple of others happened to hit.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Sin2x View Post
                    Wrong and apparently you did not read the article very attentively
                    No, you are wrong. Just because Michael was in too much of a damn hurry to run his benchmarks and couldn't be bothered to update the system like a sane user/admin would, it doesn't mean that QA would have uncovered this issue..

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by caligula View Post
                      Maybe you're not the target audience. Pacman or portage is great for ricers. Ubuntu is mainly targeting enterprises and inexperienced users.
                      Simple to use systems should be built on top of complicated and customizable systems. You see this everywhere in engineering. Car engines have so many controls you wouldn't even be able to keep track all of them, but the computer abstracts it and maintains it for you. Computer libraries are similar, tons of options and controls, and sometimes they're even exposed as a command you can invoke in the shell, but mostly they're for other programs to abstract and control and condense their usefulness into one particular subset of functionality, without actually diminishing the functionality of the system it's using. Windows has a great example, it's Group Policy system is dizzying, you can control every inch of the OS and the network it's connected on from it, but Windows also comes with countless tools that only care about portions of it which makes it far more manageable to people with less requirements. You should never excuse a poorly-built and limited tool for such an asinine logical fallacy as "well do you really need it to work better? can't you just put up with it?"

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X