this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2025
155 points (99.4% liked)

Linux

58560 readers
1402 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

To test it. That's the whole reason why the 6 months releases between the LTS releases in Ubuntu exists.

[–] 3abas@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

No... This revisionism to defend canonical is nonsense. LTS releases don't promise the most recent releases of software, but they promise security and stability updates for longer, so they are more suitable for servers and users who don't want to worry about breaking changes often.

That's it. The releases between Long Term SERVICE releases are production ready and not testing releases. They are recommended for most people.

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 23 points 1 day ago (2 children)

https://ubuntu.com/about/release-cycle

Every six months between LTS versions, Canonical publishes an interim release of Ubuntu, with 25.04 being the latest example. These are production-quality releases and are supported for 9 months, with sufficient time provided for users to update, but these releases do not receive the long-term commitment of LTS releases.

Key words "production quality". This sure doesn't seem "production quality" to me.

[–] BCBoy911@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

There's still a few weeks until 25.10 releases. If its still issues by release time I'm sure that they'll either delay the 25.10 release (as they have done in the past) or pause the coreutils-rs rollout and stick to GNU Coreutils for this release.

[–] caseyweederman@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago

Furthermore, 25.10 is a short-term release that exists as a preview for 26.04. 25.10 will receive security patches for nine months. 26.04, as an LTS, will receive security patches for up to 12 years (most of which are paid). Nobody should be seriously migrating to 25.10.
If coreutils-rs does get into the official release of 25.10 and totally tanks it, well, that's what short-term releases are for.

[–] _edge@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 day ago

We shall hope so.

A few tests failing in beta, when this can be fixed before the release, is hardly newsworthy.

However it leaves a bad taste to even consider replacing coreutils when it's nur clear that the replacement is rock solid. Those commands are used in millions of shell scripts distributed alongside applications. Should coreutils break, we'd learn the hard way.

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 3 points 1 day ago

Yes you're must likely correct. I was simply pushing back on the other poster talking like ubuntu releases other than lts are unstable/testing releases. They are intended to be stable and usable, which is certainly not the case if they include the core utils replacement as it currently stands.

[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

A test and benchmark suite from Phoronix is not production. Canonical tested software before in short term supported versions, before they include it in long term. And there was occasions when they reverted back. Production quality is a vague term. Compared to daily development releases, the interim releases are production quality.

I am not defending mistakes, I am setting expectations.

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

A test suite from phoronix having issues is certainly enough of a canary in the coalmine that this stuff is not ready for showtime. You have been saying that non-lts ubuntu releases are basically unstable releases but that has never been the intent and is not even what they say.

[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 0 points 1 day ago

The non-LTS versions are unstable by definition and that's the goal; to be unstable. And no, I am not talking about buggy stability type, but more like "unchanging, reliable". In example changing Wayland by default or back then from Unity to GNOME 3 would only happen in a non-LTS version, because that is a huge change and need to be "tested" before LTS commitment. That does not mean Canonical doesn't care about quality, but that is not the biggest goal with the in between releases. Its like Beta, a current snapshot of the development.

Canonical can state what they want, the history, actions and results are what is important. What do you think is the reason Canonical does the non LTS releases?