Solaris 11.4 To Move From GNOME 2 Desktop To GNOME Shell

[jelabarre59]

Just so funny to see the word "upgrade" being used in relation to GNOME 3.x...

[aht0]

Not talking value here. Gnome 3 is available at 0 cost, so technically its "value" is infinite. But then again, so is a case of herpes.

I was imprecise. Fischer-Price toys are one of the better quality toys around for your kid(s) to have. You can be reasonably sure that one does not disintegrate into thousand bits in child's mouth or he/she does not hurt himself/herself with such toy. It's offtopic though. Agree with you on Gnome 3.

[torsionbar28]

From a parent's point of few.. Fisher-Price toys have pretty good value. Poor analogy

Not talking value here. Gnome 3 is available at 0 cost, so technically its "value" is infinite. But then again, so is a case of herpes.

[aht0]

^ This. The Gnome 2 desktop metaphors and workflow are familiar, efficient, and timeless. The Gnome 3 Shell is a demented Speak-n-spell, defective by design. This will not bring new customers to a Solaris workstation... if anything, it will drive them away.

From a parent's point of few.. Fisher-Price toys have pretty good value. Poor analogy

[torsionbar28]

I don't see how gnome 2 looks "dated" and Gnome Shell is somehow an improvement. To me Gnome Shell looks like a Fisher-Price toy set, something for "special" people.

^ This. The Gnome 2 desktop metaphors and workflow are familiar, efficient, and timeless. The Gnome 3 Shell is a demented Speak-n-spell, defective by design. This will not bring new customers to a Solaris workstation... if anything, it will drive them away.

[oiaohm]

But it's not about Debian Testing only, it's about the fact that Google wants to move their Linux computers to a rolling release. That's very unusual in Enterprise, right? Esp. for such a large company. They can't guarantee stability with a rolling release.

You are missing that debian testing is not the full rolling release of Debian. The layout of debian

1) unstable/sid people have build distributions full based off sid https://manual.siduction.org/welcome so quality assurance has already started at this point and this is the first rolling release distribution debian and shows a lot of the behaviours of most other rolling release distributions.
2) Testing this is parts brought from sid that are presumed good enough to be included in future stable release because they have been in sid for a while and no errors were reported.
3) Stable this debian start of LTS distribution.
4) oldstable what is the prior version of stable.
5) LTS supported where only selected application are maintained.

Debian is not one distribution is 5-6 distributions.

So testing is not a pure rolling release distribution working in isolation. There is a quality control process with packages going to sid first tested there then moved to testing if there is not a problem. Anything that shows major issues in unstable/sid is rejected out to experimental repository until it fixed and does not get to testing either.

The idea that you cannot guarantee stability with a rolling release is kind of false. Debian testing over the years has proven fairly solid with sid and automated testing before packages get to enter testing.

To have a stability in a rolling release does require some serous server power that Debian has go by donations. Debian testing usage in some area of enterprise is not that strange either.

[Vistaus]

But it's not about Debian Testing only, it's about the fact that Google wants to move their Linux computers to a rolling release. That's very unusual in Enterprise, right? Esp. for such a large company. They can't guarantee stability with a rolling release.

[oiaohm]

If stability above anything else is so extremely important for corporations, then why is Google switching to a rolling release model for its production computers? They are huge so wouldn't they need extreme-tested, stable code?
http://news.softpedia.com/news/googl...x-519426.shtml

Debian Testing uses 4.14 Linux kernel. Its with the introduction of flatpak that under mines the reason for LTS distribution.

Main reason for LTS distribution was so that old applications would work. So you put the applications you need for a long time in a flatpak and it bundled with the dependencies it needs after that you ask question. If I am using flatpak for old applications that must be exact versions why would I use a LTS distribution and been running lots of libraries and applications with back-ported possible broken security fixes instead of updating those applications past the point of the security updates.

Also debian testing does more quality control than ubuntu LTS.

The stability arguement about enterprise is mostly bogus. Yes enterprise need method to run exact versions of programs. Enterprise does not need all bits of software stuck in old buggy versions so they can run exact versions of programs. LTS distributions with dependency hell at times preventing running new versions of programs also is getting in enterprise way.

It comes clear when also do some digging and find some enterprises are using selected update locations in fedora.

[Vistaus]

You're right about 4.14
But please answer my other post about Google.

[oiaohm]

4.13 and 4.14 are a moot point as they're not even an LTS kernel, so corporations aren't even using it.

https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html

Excuse me 4.14 is a LTS kernel. So any corporations keeping up on there kernel deployments new installs should be targeting 4.14.

Its repeated over and over again there LTS kernels are maintained for hardware compatibly not for security once they are no longer the current LTS kernel.

Vistaus please have your facts in order. Only 1 for the LTS kernels currently get complete KPTI patch and that is 4.14.

This is the true Elephant in the room.

Enterprises have been skipping out on investing in like https://kernelci.org/ Automated Linux Kernel Testing. To make sure the latest LTS at its release date will be compatible with the hardware enterprise wishes to run. To be secure you do need to be on the latest LTS as soon as possible.

Enterprises have been waiting for the LTS release before starting testing process and this is leaving them security vulnerable because normally by the time a new LTS linux kernel is released there is some security in the older LTS linux kernels that cannot patched properly because it requires an internal kernel structure change . The testing needs to start when the kernel is in development stage before LTS release is made. It help no one to make excuses. Yes a lot of LTS distributions don't have the latest LTS kernel as an install option and due to the security problems they deserved to be complained to about that.