The Mint 15 joke

[konjad]

imo Mint team should just go with the LTS releases and abandon versions released in between.

[SMarais]

That's why you are using LM15 and not LM13?

[konjad]

That's why you are using LM15 and not LM13?

I just installed Mint two weeks ago, I had no idea the current version would have short support.

[Monsta]

Yeah, the new users cannot know that, unless they click on Download -> All versions (on the main webpage) and get [url=http://www.linuxmint.com/oldreleases.php]here[/url].

[mzsade]

What kind of a person, unless he's a Linux Mint tester who knows his business, flits from version to version as soon as it comes out and then beefs about it? At least have the common sense to move from LTS to LTS versions, don't be such a daredevil, i am assuming the OP is like me, not someone who can build an OS from scratch..

[tek_heretik]

What kind of a person, unless he's a Linux Mint tester who knows his business, flits from version to version as soon as it comes out and then beefs about it? At least have the common sense to move from LTS to LTS versions, don't be such a daredevil, i am assuming the OP is like me, not someone who can build an OS from scratch..

Good point, I got tired of the testing and re-installing, pretty much stick with LTS now, but Mint 16 Cinnamon is enough to pull me back from Kubuntu, tired of KDE bloat and background garbage running, I don't need nepomuk, etc. I having issues with printing too, my system and printer worked fine before with other distros, now I have to reboot to print a second time, very annoying. Still testing 16/Cin live, just to make sure.

[FledgeHammer]

Like several others who have commented here, I am a relatively new refugee from windows, though not an absolute newbie to Linux. After being confused for years about the differences between Fedora, Ubuntu, PC Linux OS, Red Hat, KDE, Mint, Suse, yatta yatta, I finally took the plunge with Mint 14 (Nadia) Cinnamon. After becoming somewhat familiar, I installed it on my wife's PC in dual boot with windows XP.

When the hard disk on my pc crashed, Olivia was already released by then, so rather than reinstalling Nadia, I went with Olivia. And NOW I find that Olivia is only supported for one more month.

One of the reasons for fleeing the Microsoft camp was the forced migration every few years, and with support for XP ending soon, and the horrible reviews windows 8 was getting, I made my break. If I had known about support for Olivia ending in January, and support for Nadia ending in April, I would have went with Maya on both my PC and wife's PC.

But no use crying over spilt milk. The question is what to do now. What I really want to know is WHAT HAPPENS WHEN SUPPORT ENDS? Will update manager cease to function? Will our PCs be vulnerable to attackers? Suppose we just sit back and wait for Mint 17, what happens in the meanwhile?

PS: I am not a guru and not particularly intent on becoming one, all I want is a PC that works! (That's why I migrated to Linux!)

[mzsade]

No offense but unless you are differently abled with a penchant for gay abandon, it's business as usual; i still use Isadora (Linux Mint 9)
Wish you a happy new year with all my heart

[Pierre]

The question is what to do now. What I really want to know is WHAT HAPPENS WHEN SUPPORT ENDS? Will update manager cease to function? Will our PCs be vulnerable to attackers?

Zilch - Nada - Nothing

- the repo's go 'offline' - so nothing happens .. ..

My OLD laptop has Mint 5 LTS on it - it still works just fine.
- FF is stuck at v11 & it hasn't been upgraded, but that is easy.

My NEW laptop has Mint 9 LTS on it - it still works just fine too.
- FF was stuck at v20 & just was manually upgraded to v26 ..

otherwise, neither is a liability, either to use, or in it's security.
- an out-of-date Linux O/S is still more secure than an up-to-date O/S from M$.

if you need some function in a software package that is installed onto your PC,
then that is a reason to upgrade to a more recent O/S, Eg: Gimp. v2.6 - v2.8.

- it really is a personal choice, as to whether you stay with an "unsupported O/S"
whether that is win_XP in april, or when your Linux repo's are gone .. ..

[Monsta]

What I really want to know is WHAT HAPPENS WHEN SUPPORT ENDS?

First, the repositories stop getting any updates.

Second, sometime after that (maybe a few weeks, maybe a few months) the repositories are moved to old-releases.ubuntu.com. Your repository-related tools (apt-get, Synaptic, update manager) will show errors while trying to update. To fix that, you'll need to change a few entries in the sources list like shown here or here. Note that starting from Mint 15, /etc/apt/sources.list file is not used anymore; you'll need to locate a file inside /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ directory (most probably it would be /etc/apt/sources.list.d/official-package-repositories.list) and edit it instead. After that, you would be able to use the repositories as before (e.g. install anything you want), there just won't be any updates in them.

It only applies to Ubuntu repositories. As for the Mint repositories, they are not moved anywhere, they are left at their usual place at packages.linuxmint.com.

[FledgeHammer]

Thanks to all who answered my questions. I guess both my wife and I will stick with what we have now and wait for 17. Will probably upgrade at that time, but we'll cross our bridges when we get to them.

[Monsta]

Ubuntu 13.04 reaches End of Life on January 27, 2014 (in two days), and so is Mint 15. I think this should be announced in the Mint blog.

[konjad]

Thanks for the info, I guess I'll make final update today just in case. Then I'll wait until Mint 17 Xfce is released.

[wheeledgoat]

imo Mint team should just go with the LTS releases and abandon versions released in between.

I donno if I agree. The LTS versions are there if that's what you like - better documentation for newcomers on the download page would be ideal.

I don't consider myself much of a tinkerer these days (used to have much more time to play, before I created these little humans that rely on me for just about everything) - but I still enjoy the new releases.

Besides, don't we serve as a bit of a test-bed for the developers when we download the new versions and then complain about what doesn't work in the forums? Aren't the LTS versions all the more stable for this?

[jharris1993]

Besides, don't we serve as a bit of a test-bed for the developers when we download the new versions and then complain about what doesn't work in the forums? Aren't the LTS versions all the more stable for this?

Absolutely!

However. . . . . (Seems there's always a "however" in there somewhere, doesn't it? )

As I understand the thread, the major point is not the question of "should or shouldn't there be different releases with different time lines" The major point that I see is the question of transparency and giving the person making the download the ability to choose which download pathway they want to follow. And in many cases this will depend on the user and/or the ultimate end-use of the system/distribution in question.

For my wife's computer? LTS all the way! (and, maybe, do not put her in sudoers?)
For my "main squeeze" laptop that I depend on? Right! Stick with the LTS releases!
For my " 'effing around with" systems - the interim releases are just fine.

IMHO, it's not the release, or the length of support, per-se, it's giving the person making the download the information he/she needs to make an informed decision.

What say ye?

Jim (JR)