Ubuntu 17.04 Now Available For Download

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Ubuntu 17.04 Now Available For Download

Ubuntu mirrors are now live with the final builds of 17.04 "Zesty Zapus" for those wanting to upgrade to this latest six-month release of Ubuntu Linux...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Ubuntu-17.04-Download

[bug77]

For some reason, switching to Nvidia GPU on hybrid laptop seems to be particularly troublesome this time around. The Nvidia X Server Settings shows up almost empty and selecting the Nvidia GPU won't stick. I don't recall ever having an issue with this...

Griffin If you're into Gnome, yeah, that should be an easy pick. But as far as standard in concerned, Ubuntu Gnome ranks behind Ubuntu, Ubunti MATE, Xubuntu, Kubuntu or KDE Neon on distrowatch.

Edit: And today everything works just fine. Go figure.

[sloth77]

"Another pleasant change of Ubuntu 17.04 is the move on new installations from using SWAP partitions to just using swap files now, for saving space and being easier to manage. "

Isn't performance much better with swap partitions though? I thought that was the main reason that Linux retained them.

[DanL]

People should just get the Ubuntu GNOME edition. That is the standard Linux Desktop anyway.

Do not feed. Do not feed. Do not feed...

[bug77]

"Another pleasant change of Ubuntu 17.04 is the move on new installations from using SWAP partitions to just using swap files now, for saving space and being easier to manage. "

Isn't performance much better with swap partitions though? I thought that was the main reason that Linux retained them.

Not really. The swap partition is a solution for the HDD era. I haven't used a swap partition in years and never noticed a performance difference. Plus, with 8+ GB RAM, Linux hardly swaps anyway.

[karasu]

Isn't performance much better with swap partitions though? I thought that was the main reason that Linux retained them.

I'm not sure you can talk about "performance" when the swap is being used I think it's a good idea, although I'm completely fine without any swap space.

[DanL]

Isn't performance much better with swap partitions though? I thought that was the main reason that Linux retained them.

From what I've read, the performance difference isn't significant as long as the swap file isn't fragmented. Using a lot of swap (especially on a mechanical disk) is going to be slow whether it's a partition or a file.
For less technically-minded users, a swap file seems a better choice over a partition.

[DanL]

Plus, with 8+ GB RAM, Linux hardly swaps anyway.

I hardly use any swap on my 4GB system, except maybe a little when using a VM. I'm not a big multitasker though.

[randomizer]

Isn't performance much better with swap partitions though? I thought that was the main reason that Linux retained them.

A partition mitigates the access time penalty of filesystem fragmentation by cordoning off a portion of the disk from unrelated writes. For an SSD the difference between a partition and a file should be negligible. Most people still use HDDs, but as HDD performance is much better than it used to be and RAM capacity has increased (resulting in lower swap usage) the performance penalty of fragmentation is probably not nearly as significant as it once was. If you need to use so much swap that fragmentation is a problem then your performance is probably already terrible.

[bug77]

Ubuntu GNOME have a larger market share than any of the spins based on lesser desktops. Oh and you might have missed the big news. Gnome will soon be default desktop on Ubuntu as well.

Congratulations to the lesser desktops anyway. It is nice for them to rank high on the most useless list ever. At least it is better than nothing.

Feel free to link proof.