> In fact right now the Software Updater will only ask you to upgrade if you have enabled it to do so to any new Ubuntu release, but not if you have chosen to do only for long support ones.
Wait a moment, isn't Xenial an LTS release? Anyway, that's irrelevant. Non-LTS are not supposed to be some sort of unstable alpha releases. Also, if one has Ubuntu 15.10 in the first place, they must have chosen to get non-LTS releases (unless they have changed the setting later), and one kind of "has to" (meaning is supposed to) upgrade to 16.04, or they'll have an unsupported EOL release soon. Or are you telling me that when you choose to get non-LTS releases, you also get LTS releases earlier? If that is the case, that's a pretty stupid design. LTS vs non-LTS is not (or shouldn't be) stable vs beta. You are supposed to choose to stick to LTS if you don't want to upgrade too often, and you choose non-LTS if you don't mind being "forced" to upgrade every six months (otherwise you loose "support") for the benefit of having more up-to-date software. You are not supposed to be trading off stability for that. Yes, as a side effect one might expect an LTS to be even more rock-solid as it becomes old and outdated, but you don't expect a non-LTS to be a minefield. Sticking to LTSs only, by the way, means sticking to age-old (compared to upstream) software, usually full of bugs that are already fixed upstream but whose fixes will only land to Ubuntu in 5 years, and the version you are using of any given package is likely to be considered obsolete and not supported by the upstream maintainers. So the choice is between that scenario on one side and terribly unstable software on the other? Cool! I guess I should try some other distribution. > Apart from that I cannot figure out a way we could prevent that error from happening at present. What about shutting down the servers? (I mean, if you cannot figure out how to retire a release) > We just require a few more people testing the operating system before release And while you don't have that, you need to test them a little more (no, a LOT more) before release. And if it's not decent-stable by when it was expected to be, then delay the damn release! You should abandon the fixed-date release cycle if you actually give a damn about quality. 2016-04-30 1:16 GMT+02:00 Alberto Salvia Novella <[email protected]>: > Teo Teo: > >> I mean, when my computer tells me that there is an upgrade available, it's >> because it has asked some server, right? Even if it had already stored the >> response, it still has to download the upgrade from somewhere. So, I don't >> see the difficulty... >> > > In fact right now the Software Updater will only ask you to upgrade if you > have enabled it to do so to any new Ubuntu release, but not if you have > chosen to do only for long support ones. So the malicious upgrade is not > affecting novel users or large deployments. > > And if you have already upgraded to Xenial and found this bug, you can > repair it by reinstalling the release using a live disk. It sucks a little > bit, but is still fast and easy for most people. > > Apart from that I cannot figure out a way we could prevent that error from > happening at present. We just require a few more people testing the > operating system before release, so it is just a matter of good work and > patience till Ubuntu is popular enough to have some more testers. > > > -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
