We need a serious evlauation of the LMDE "rolling release".

[rjs]

Just tried to do an update from the extremely old LMDE iso that is listed and never updated. It's a joke. You cannot get a decent upgrade of 1001 packages with an iso so outdated that it looks like slackware 1.

Might we please have updated iso's so the many hours of work it takes to upgrade are not wasted? Far too many issues. My opinion is pitch out the whole rolling release ideas and keep updated, upgraded, and working iso's on the site. About done with mint. And it's not that I don't like it, it's just too much a waste of time doing upgrades and breaks more than it's worth when upgrading from extremely old iso's. 1001 packages and LinuxMint cannot create a new image for it? Frustrating as all get out.

[zerozero]

is here somewhere a RFH that i missed or shall i move the topic to chat?
the latest iso is from april (old yes but not ancient) and

FAQ

Will LMDE get new ISO images with Update Pack 5?

Yes, in the coming weeks/months, the following editions will be released either with Update Pack 5 or Update Pack 6 (depending on whether UP6 is a quick/short follow-up update-pack or not):

Cinnamon
MATE
Xfce

here >> http://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=2170
furthermore those 1001 packages are UP5

the rolling release concept was already dropped

3. What is a semi-rolling distribution?

Updates are constantly fed to Debian Testing, where users experience frequent regressions but also frequent bug fixes and improvements. LMDE receives “Update Packs” which are tested snapshots of Debian Testing. Users can experience a more stable system thanks to update packs, or switch their sources to follow Testing, or even Unstable, directly to get more frequent updates.

here >> http://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=1967

now, do you really have any issue to report?

[ringo32]

Upgrade Packs are for sure good, but when you update on that level on now, it will break faster then you know... called LMDE more a Cycle rolling then a semi-rolling.. on my machine load stable for sure and system-service is nice to cut more memory to control the startup, but personally it can be better, now these days would testing frozen i get such a update you will not have but next year i gues


i like lmde but i gona fooled my self if i go back

[rjs]

"now, do you really have any issue to report?"

Thanks for the ideas, and yes I do.

Yes. It's an issue zero. Bottom line it's more like 1360 to be updated after an iso install and grows by the day. But what's a few hundred more packages? Suggestions for fixes? Sure.

1) Roll out the new iso's first prior to the update packs
2) Limit how many updates are allowed prior to upgrading the iso's. Say maybe 300 files at most for updates over what is provided from the iso's.

Look Zero, you may not see this as an issue, but it is. 1360 updates after installing an iso is far too much. There isn't a distro on the planet that doesn't update the iso's until the updates reach 2000 files.

And yes, there are problems with trying to update that many files. Things go wrong. Updates don't always work right etc.. and so on. Common sense.
Sorry you didn't like my opinion, and I love linuxmint debian. But the iso's need to be kept up better so there aren't as many files to upgrade. It's a headache.

[zerozero]

i love lmde as well and i'm not entirely convinced yet that the UP were the best thing we got. sure they made debian testing more predictable and workable but they (UP) have several drawbacks, this one you are pointing out (the huge amount of updates in one batch) is one of them;

usually (usually) the UP are not very disruptive (UP5 was not too bad in general: a severe problem with ati users and a regression in the font rendering and then some minor issues) but sometimes (hello UP4 ) they can be nasty.

the way lmde was designed at the beginning (tracking directly testing without any buffer) was a lot "cleaner" but also harder to maintain by the user this blog entry explaining UP with more than one year is still pretty much actual

yes, the isos should be updated more often but this time the iso isn't broken (as happened before) and a new one is in the works
http://www.linuxmint.com/rel_debian_whatsnew.php

all the fast developed distros (rolling, semi-rolling, half-rolling) have a huge amount of updates (in a good week testing can give us hundreds of updates - not now ofc) so should be no surprise if snapshots taken a couple months away will amount to thousands (yet again i agree that huge batches are harder to debug)

[GeneC]

Oddly...
We seem to see more displeasure with LMDE from the folks tracking the Update Packs, than from those tracking either Testing (as LMDE was originally set up), or those like me tracking SID.

For point of reference those of us tracking SID viewtopic.php?f=198&t=70230&p=406197#p406197 have not really seen ANY kind of issue for about 4 months, and those issues were minor and quickly (one day) fixed. I update daily, and could guess that on average there are about 10-25 package updates daily. I am sure the same is true for those tracking Testing. viewtopic.php?f=198&t=67502 with even less issues and updates.

I enjoy tracking SID. Many of us find this quite acceptable and even fun.
rjs has a valid point of the huge number of updates that come with UP's. I agree with him that more updated .isos should be made available for new installations. I recently had more issues updating a new install from UP4 to UP5, than I have running SID for the past year. I can see how this can be frustrating, especially to new users. You download a 1+GB .iso install it, and then have to upgrade another 1+GB on updates.....
A new .iso should be made for every Update Pack.

This comes to the issue of stability.

3. What is a semi-rolling distribution?

Updates are constantly fed to Debian Testing, where users experience frequent regressions but also frequent bug fixes and improvements. LMDE receives “Update Packs” which are tested snapshots of Debian Testing. Users can experience a more stable system thanks to update packs, or switch their sources to follow Testing, or even Unstable, directly to get more frequent updates.

They ARE tested by the development team, but be aware that the 'team' is quite small (not quite on the Microsoft level of employees... ). Probably less than you can count on one hand. Never been real clear myself who is on the LMDE dev team (besides Clem ?). But with the limited amount of testers, and hardware to test on, there can no doubt be issues with any new Update Pack.

To my way of looking at it, the Update Pack idea is still a work in progress. The well intentioned object of 'monthly update packs' has not been feasible with the many changes to Gnome (2.3, 3.0, 3.2, 3.4, now 3.6.. ), several new Desktops (Mate, Cinnamon, the new Gnome), et. et.

To me an easier to maintain LMDE is tracking Testing or SID, with XFCE, or KDE for a desktop.
Update daily, follow the breakage threads (above), and make weekly clones, and you will be a happy LMDE user....

[Monsta]

LMDE probably just needs a dedicated team. And a few outside-of-update-packs fixes.

[jjaythomas]

I have a few issues with LMDE mostly XFCE roll and many things old versions (DEBIAN VERY STABLE THO)

The update process (with Upacks extra layer of borkage protection) hasn't bee one of them.

P.S. i update from 'Swift Linux' distro (LMDE based 32bit with ISO at UPack 2 (maybe3 ) and I update (1100+ packages) no problem. Also switch its DM to MDM and swap out 'icewm' for Xfce and delete and add other stuff (including kernel).

J.Jay

Edit Also 'Clonezilla partitions to other (totally different) computers.

[zerozero]

LMDE probably just needs a dedicated team. And a few outside-of-update-packs fixes.

i would love to see that idea gain steam.

To me an easier to maintain LMDE is tracking Testing or SID, with XFCE, or KDE for a desktop.

Ditto!
but... the UP make sense for several reasons:
1- makes testing predictable and easy for newcomers and newbies;
2- gives an extra layer of stability if you want to use lmde in a corporate/business environment;
(the issues are not with UP itself but their frequency)
3- gives the mint team a buffer to fix and coordinate with upstream regressions (not only the never ending gtk mutations but also xorg/mesa stack)
4- furthermore now with the focus on cinnamon and mate is important to have control on upstream's flow (specially if like with testing it's changing daily)
5- and all this keeping full compatibility with upstream (even the font rendering patches were dropped because they in one one word were breaking that compatibility.

[GeneC]

Hey 'zz'

I agree with Monsta on the dedicated team, I run LMDE and Maya, but LMDE is my love...

I also agree with you, that the UP's are the best track to take for those who want or need a more stable system. SID has been awesomely stable the past few months, but breakages are always just a possible click away..... Its fun for you and I, and the others following Testing and SID, but not the solution for those running a business or whatever.

I certainly do hope to see a dedicated team for LMDE in the future (perhaps we have one now.. ), but it appears to be Clem and occasional helpers.
Mint Team http://www.linuxmint.com/teams.php
Of the original 'maintainers', it appears only CLEM is left...
Clem is certainly busy enough with the 6 month Mint releases, CInnamon (which is developing nicely), and all the other stuff on his plate. I sure would like to see him have an LMDE team development leader.. (How is your coding..... ). Kidding.

[jamvaru]

I don't have a use for LMDE, lm 13 mate works fine for me; don't really get why need lmde, except as a curiosity
I suppose you keep abreast of developments, like the latest cheese, for example, etc.
I found I didn't like the default lmde install, though you can of course modify as needed, the beauty of linux/gnu

I would suggest the following

1. A regular iso for LMDE 'stable' (perhaps monthly)
2. A more than regular iso for LMDE 'testing' ... say 2x as often as 'stable' (perhaps weekly)
3. A version of LMDE that is truly 'rolling', using the nightly builds, offering daily updates of changes (offer a 'daily' iso ... should be some way to autocompile an iso image on a daily basis, doesn't debian do it?)

also, include the major DE's on the same dvd.. no reason at all to have separate dvd's for xfce, mate, kde, etc... offer a chooser at install, which do you want as default... checkboxes can deselect whatever you don't want if space is an issue... offer a cd version for those who have bandwidth issues (duuh?)

[ringo32]

couldn resist lmde again on my pc, let settle it on second hdd....it ruined my other.... i must say, im coming back on some busenes.. But lmde drives responsive enough en easy cutting in memory use

to have regulary email en update i installed Opera and google-chrome then is minimal internet-proof


i must seriously stop hopping, but LMDE base is find, i only hope more people using it
Mayby then they develop it more

to autocomple is more arch stuff, i like it too, but some stufff is a junk really


gr ringo

[Quirken]

What I'd like to see is a convenient way to keep update packs... but then flag individual packages (and dependencies) to keep updated from Testing.

For all back-end/system stuff, I'm fine with waiting a few months for updates. For a lot of my user apps (such as Firefox), I want updates as they come out, and waiting isn't really an option for me.

Now, I could compile them from source, or install them in a local folder... but that can be quite a pain.

This type of solution would give you overall system stability, and if something goes wrong, you'd only have a handful of packages to troubleshoot. The benefits of both a rolling distro, and semi-rolling distro.

It sounds like the closest thing is the Incoming repository... it's a sort of 'release candidate' for the next update pack, right?

[KBD47]

Debian is very hard to beat, light, fast, dependable. It will work on old hardware when nothing else will, and on newer hardware it flies. I think it is safe to say that most people who have used it for any length of time probably stick with it.
LMDE is excellent #1 because it is so easy to install. I just installed vanilla Debian Wheezy yesterday, and even though the release was only 11 days old, using disk 1 it took a solid hour just to install it. Then it took me on an off all day just to add everything I needed to simply make my machine usable. Now I'm not complaining, just trying to give you some perspective. Last week I installed LMDE Mate/Cinnamon 201204. It took me about 20 minutes to install, and about an hour to add update pack 5. But then I was done, no looking for codecs, no having to install flash, no adding my favorite software (which LMDE mostly already has). There are huge advantages to LMDE.
The update issue has a thousand opinions. I think a Debian Stable Mint with a Mint repo to keep updated browsers/select software is the way to go, less work for everyone, more reliable. Would just need a new spin when point releases came out. Why do I like Stable? It doesn't break easily and gets few updates to do the breaking.
But Mint uses update packs. This is actually quite reliable considering every other option except the one I just mentioned. Updates break things, the great thing about Debian is it seems to break things with updates less often than some other distros. I'm at the point now that unless it's Debian and I'm setting it up for someone else, I don't enable any updates except security. So an LMDE with update packs may be much better than it sounds or appears at first glance.
kbd

[jjaythomas]

For all back-end/system stuff, I'm fine with waiting a few months for updates. For a lot of my user apps (such as Firefox), I want updates as they come out, and waiting isn't really an option for me.

Ditto (flagging of apps) like backports get a express lane thru

P.S. FF and couple others are maintained outside of debian and can (and do/did) come thru ouside of a UPack.

J.Jay

[Quirken]

For all back-end/system stuff, I'm fine with waiting a few months for updates. For a lot of my user apps (such as Firefox), I want updates as they come out, and waiting isn't really an option for me.

Ditto (flagging of apps) like backports get a express lane thru

P.S. FF and couple others are maintained outside of debian and can (and do/did) come thru ouside of a UPack.

J.Jay

I know, but often times it's significantly more work for the end user. Some workarounds aren't integrated in the package manager, so when a stable update is available, you won't get it. Other workarounds require you to add a bunch of repositories maintained by people you don't know and have no particular reason to trust.

I guess the way I'd suggest doing this is creating syntax for a customized repository, where you list only the packages you want. I'm not super familiar with syntax here, but something along the lines of:

Code: Select all

deb http://debian.linuxmint.com/custom sid firefox thunderbird xchat rssowl vlc

where you list the individual packages you want to pull out of a less stable build, and it automatically figures out dependencies based on that. It'd need to generate the appropriate paths and would require more backend support, and obviously the end user would be on their own to some extent. But it could give you the safety and stability of update packs with calculated risks with software you want more up to date.

All the packages I want are already in one linux mint repo or another. The problem is you can't mix and match just a few things from a repo without significant effort.

[jjaythomas]

sorry if not clear...
I was agreeing wish their was a way to 'let thru' packages for app upgrades.

Just pointed out FF (not being in native Debian) acually comes from Mint own repo not thru UPack (it has at least once!)

J.Jay

[rop75]

i think that most of the guys who demand more features don't understand what the actual situation is: Linux Mint gets about 10.000 $ by donations or sponsors every month. With this money you can't afford a big team that can do all the work that many of you are asking for. I think that the Mint staff (and the volunteers and testers that help them) have done a great work, and of course there are things that could be better (ie I don't like the UPs system), but I understand that the Mint guys are doing their best with such small amount of money and they have never asked me to pay a fee to use LMDE. So what I did was keeping my LMDE and changing my repos to get my updates more often, and what I didn't do was complaining and demanding more and more features. I am saying this, because if I worked on a non-profit project like this and I read this thread , I would feel really disappointed and frustrated

PS: For all those who ask for a LMDE UP 5 iso: You have three ways: First download the UP4 and upgrade to UP5, second download Debian wheezy and add the llinuxmint repos, third wait for Mint team to release the iso (Clem said that this would happen when UP 6 were released).

[Quirken]

i think that most of the guys who demand more features don't understand what the actual situation is: Linux Mint gets about 10.000 $ by donations or sponsors every month. With this money you can't afford a big team that can do all the work that many of you are asking for. I think that the Mint staff (and the volunteers and testers that help them) have done a great work, and of course there are things that could be better (ie I don't like the UPs system), but I understand that the Mint guys are doing their best with such small amount of money and they have never asked me to pay a fee to use LMDE. So what I did was keeping my LMDE and changing my repos to get my updates more often, and what I didn't do was complaining and demanding more and more features. I am saying this, because if I worked on a non-profit project like this and I read this thread , I would feel really disappointed and frustrated

There's a huge difference between a suggestion of a feature you'd really like to see... and "demanding." Yes, the OP's attitude was fairly rude, but things have been civil and constructive for a while. Until you started complaining about people complaining, and I just now complained about you complaining about someone else complaining. Let's not derail the thread, please -_-

LMDE is great. I understand there are limited resources at play, which is why I was suggesting a feature I'd like to see. Will I be butthurt if it is never implemented? No. Do I expect it will get implemented? Probably not, but I'd love it if it was.

PS: For all those who ask for a LMDE UP 5 iso: You have three ways: First download the UP4 and upgrade to UP5, second download Debian wheezy and add the llinuxmint repos, third wait for Mint team to release the iso (Clem said that this would happen when UP 6 were released).

The OP's complaint was that there was too much downloading going on in a fresh install (he was complaining about the process to "download the UP4 and upgrade to UP5"). I don't imagine going from wheezy would be much faster, but maybe it would be. Far as the third option (wait)... well, I think you'd be better off waiting for the download

If you have a broadband connection, the UPs aren't too painful to download. Sure, it's a bit of a drag, but just leave the room for a while while it downloads. I'm sure we can all agree that in a perfect world, you'd install the mint ISO and it would be up to date. But limited resources should go towards things that will impact your computer AFTER it is installed, not during - that part only happens once!

[jjaythomas]

PS: For all those who ask for a LMDE UP 5 iso: You have three ways: First download the UP4 and upgrade to UP5, second download Debian wheezy and add the llinuxmint repos, third wait for Mint team to release the iso (Clem said that this would happen when UP 6 were released).

Maybe 4 (if need to do on multiple computers) clonezilla/remastersys ect. once and install multiple times (I have 'PartedMagic on USB stick and 2nd partition on same stick for cloned partition Images. One USB stick (mine's 32GB) with curent (what I use as base install) on multiple computers. Almost as easy as a seperate ISO instal.

J.Jay

P.S. Because I don't use 'official LMDE(X) based ISO, it doesn't effect me anyways

Question Does downloading a new ISO take significantly less time then a UPack upgrade?? or just upgrade problems (I haven't personally seen any)?