We use Ubuntu 6.06 LTS/Dapper on practically all the servers we setup and maintain, however in the last months we experienced that more and more new hardware isn’t supported.
The latest example is a missing driver for a hardware timer clock thingy on the HP DL145G3 (check peter’s blog for more info), which is required for asterisk. Now we have to install Edgy on this server which doesn’t suit us really well. Another example is a problem on a desktop machine with the Intel G965 chipset, fixed with Edgy but Dapper would be better.
So I really hope Dapper will get a new kernel, else we’ll need another LTS release this summer or we have to start backporting our selves (or find an alternative).
A quick check on IRC said there were no plans for a new kernel version but that missing drivers would (or might?) be backported if bugs are filed. So at least I have something to do when I’m back at the office. But I hope the matter has or gets serious attention to prevent that the LTS release will lose value more and more over time.
No related posts.
I’m not sure that the point of LTS was to support all upcoming hardware for the whole period…? Sounds like it could be risky to try and do that, too.
PS Why do all these blogs require an email address when there is absolutely zero validation that it’s a real address, and already do other various stuff to prevent spam? DS
LTS does indeed loose significant value over time.. Allmost immidiately when 6.10 with FF2 was released.. 6.06 went unusable on the desktop since the FF2 rendering is far superior to the FF1.5 in 6.06.
This is really a shame sine the drive-support in 6.06 is far superior to 6.10. I wish Ubuntu had a scheme for handling these kind of updates to a stable release.
We have the same issue with the dapper kernel not supporting recent hardware, so we backported a 2.6.20 kernel from feisty to use it on dapper.
ubuntu just is not ready for long term support..
red hat and suse do it right, ubuntu does not.
If you have a commercial support agreement with Canonical, we escalate those bugs to fast track them for customers that need them, sometimes providing a solution or workaround within days or even hours. This counts for one regular support case under a standard agreement.
Any escalation support customers (meaning anyone that get a support contract for reselling support from Canonical) also gets access to this fast track.
All those bugs (not only kernel) are intended to be included in the next LTS maintenance release, however as you said there is still no ETA for that. It is a delicate proposition, personally I prefer to issue individual patches to specific customers, and then make them public gradually. It is a process that takes time and testing.
To find out more about how/why/when stable release updates are accepted, please see:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates
I’ ll be happy to answer any questions as best as I can here or if you fill the support contact form at ubuntu.com:
http://www.canonical.com/support/webtolead
Just add ” attn: Fabian” in the Requirements Description section.
I’ve had some fun & games recently with Dapper on vaguely modern kit.
As it turns out, there IS a newer kernel in dapper-proposed; 2.6.15-50; which supported all the non-functional hardware in the machine (the SAS and network controllers in a Dell 1950). I’ve successfully built an install CD based on this newer kernel – however, there’s no linux-restricted-modules to go with it, which is something of a pain.
A me too here! In our job we are trying to put all the new servers with 6.06 (and migrate olders one) but it’s difficult with hardware with not support and others bugs.
For reference, bugs that affecting us:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-source-2.6.15/+bug/32752
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-source-2.6.17/+bug/60764
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/netkit-tftp/+bug/71644
I have had the same problem. We love ubuntu and I put 6.06 on most things that can handle it.
A bigger issue that I have found is that many of the bugs that I legitimately log against Ubuntu are often (sometimes rudely) closed with the rationale that the problem is fixed in edgy or feisty.
One particular example is the fact that skencil, which ships with standard 6.06 doesn’t even start because of a seeming library incompatibility.
When this has been pointed out the reviewers just state that it is fixed in later releases. At the same time other reviewers agree that it is a bug that needs to be fixed. However, my point is that it hasn’t worked from the start and it should if LTS is supposed to live up to its name. The inconsistency is very confusing and troubling.
I would hope that Canonical et al gets everyone on the ball about what exactly their policy will be about LTS and hopefully communicate that to the public more effectively.
i came across this blog post while searching for other LTS information. I thought I would leave a note here about Ubuntu 6.06.2 LTS, an update to Ubuntu 6.06.1 LTS that was announced at Ubuntu Live last July.
It should be out in the next few days, here’s the list of targetted bugs:
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+milestone/ubuntu-6.06.2
@Jim: Skencil is not part of the “main” repository, it is in “universe” which means Canonical does not provide any updates to it. FYI, once a release is out, there are no feature upgrades (except in rare situations), only security updates.