Ubuntu 22.10 Readied With The Linux 5.19 Kernel

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Ubuntu 22.10 Readied With The Linux 5.19 Kernel

As expected, Ubuntu 22.10 will be powered by the Linux 5.19 kernel...

https://www.phoronix.com/news/Ubuntu-22.10-Linux-5.19

[Danny3]

It doesn't matter, Snaps will drag the performance out of it anyway!

[birdie]

It doesn't matter, Snaps will drag the performance out of it anyway!

No one forces you to use Ubuntu in the first place. I wonder why more people don't use Fedora which is IMO the best Linux distro out there. Stable enough, fresh enough and has a ton of packages including Corp's.

[kylew77]

I wonder how many people run non-lts Ubuntu and its derivatives. I've heard they are frightenging unstable. Heck this years LTS release had a few stability issues. I think I will keep my family on Xubuntu LTS, no reason not to.

[skeevy420]

No one forces you to use Ubuntu in the first place. I wonder why more people don't use Fedora which is IMO the best Linux distro out there. Stable enough, fresh enough and has a ton of packages including Corp's.

I'm using Fedora now. I don't like it. If I wasn't in the middle of some things I'd have already switched it out for Arch.

The way Fedora operates reminds me too much of Microsoft Windows. Most notably the way they update the system and how it has no verbose output. At best you edit the kernel command line and remove quite or you can hit a key and switch from Plymouth to verbose boot output that shows the update running as a text based percentage update. Only to change a percentage bar to a percentage text. Fuck me, what a tease.

Verbose output during updates, installs, and package management in general is literally the one single feature that made me do the switch from Windows 2000 to Debian instead of going on to Windows XP. Fedora trying their damnedest to hide that from me makes me not like Fedora. Because of that, I can't in good conscience recommend or use a distribution that actively hides what I consider to be the most important information from the user just to appease non-technical people.

Seriously. I've read the Git issues over this. It's because they think it looks better to the average person.

I know I can run dnf manually and get output that way, but that defeats the purpose of automatic offline updates.

[skeevy420]

I wonder how many people run non-lts Ubuntu and its derivatives. I've heard they are frightenging unstable. Heck this years LTS release had a few stability issues. I think I will keep my family on Xubuntu LTS, no reason not to.

The Stability in LTS isn't in regards to packages running and not crashing Stability, it's Stability in knowing that package versions, features, and advertised abilities don't change on a whim or become incompatible. For example, you won't get the 3.0 of a program that changes command flags around and does bug fixes unless it is able to be patched to use the previous version's flags; you'll be stuck on the 2.9 version that has known issues when processing JPEG-XL so you have to stick to JPEG. That's Stability.

[samuelec]

I'm a dev and I'm still running Kubuntu LTS 20.04 that I use for work, I don't want any surprise.
It works, yes, I'm looking to upgrade but only because new software.
I don't understand why so much hate in the comments, CPUs nowadays are super fast ans I prefer stability over raw performance... maybe mine are different needs

[user1]

I'm using Fedora now. I don't like it. If I wasn't in the middle of some things I'd have already switched it out for Arch.

The way Fedora operates reminds me too much of Microsoft Windows. Most notably the way they update the system and how it has no verbose output. At best you edit the kernel command line and remove quite or you can hit a key and switch from Plymouth to verbose boot output that shows the update running as a text based percentage update. Only to change a percentage bar to a percentage text. Fuck me, what a tease.

Verbose output during updates, installs, and package management in general is literally the one single feature that made me do the switch from Windows 2000 to Debian instead of going on to Windows XP. Fedora trying their damnedest to hide that from me makes me not like Fedora. Because of that, I can't in good conscience recommend or use a distribution that actively hides what I consider to be the most important information from the user just to appease non-technical people.

Seriously. I've read the Git issues over this. It's because they think it looks better to the average person.

I know I can run dnf manually and get output that way, but that defeats the purpose of automatic offline updates.

To me, what you described here is too small of a reason to dislike an entire distro. First, what's so important for you in verbose output during updates? And also, don't you see which packages are going to be upgraded before you start the update process anyway?

[skeevy420]

To me, what you described here is too small of a reason to dislike an entire distro. First, what's so important for you in verbose output during updates? And also, don't you see which packages are going to be upgraded before you start the update process anyway?

Everything is what's important. It can be very practical to know what caused the issue down to the package and file.

Funny you say that. It's because I can see which packages are going to be upgraded that I'd like to see the output. For example, I use OpenZFS via DKMS. I'd like to know if my modules compile when the kernel updates versus having to log in, check, and possibly rebooting to an LTS kernel. I've had some bad updates in the decades I've used Linux and, because of that, verbose output is very important to me.

[birdie]

I'm using Fedora now. I don't like it. If I wasn't in the middle of some things I'd have already switched it out for Arch.

The way Fedora operates reminds me too much of Microsoft Windows. Most notably the way they update the system and how it has no verbose output. At best you edit the kernel command line and remove quite or you can hit a key and switch from Plymouth to verbose boot output that shows the update running as a text based percentage update. Only to change a percentage bar to a percentage text. Fuck me, what a tease.

Verbose output during updates, installs, and package management in general is literally the one single feature that made me do the switch from Windows 2000 to Debian instead of going on to Windows XP. Fedora trying their damnedest to hide that from me makes me not like Fedora. Because of that, I can't in good conscience recommend or use a distribution that actively hides what I consider to be the most important information from the user just to appease non-technical people.

Seriously. I've read the Git issues over this. It's because they think it looks better to the average person.

I know I can run dnf manually and get output that way, but that defeats the purpose of automatic offline updates.

I've always updated in CLI, so not sure what you're missing there. First it was yum, then dnf. Don't remember what was there before yum, it was more than two decades ago. I absolutely hate all the GUI updaters regardless the OS. Windows Updater and MacOS updaters are the worst of course. The least verbose as humanly possible while outputting cryptic human-unreadable error messages.