this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2024
1401 points (96.8% liked)
linuxmemes
23488 readers
931 users here now
Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
- Instance-wide TOS: https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
- Lemmy code of conduct: https://join-lemmy.org/docs/code_of_conduct.html
2. Be civil
3. Post Linux-related content
sudo in Windows.4. No recent reposts
5. π¬π§ Language/ΡΠ·ΡΠΊ/Sprache
6. (NEW!) Regarding public figures
We all have our opinions, and certain public figures can be divisive. Keep in mind that this is a community for memes and light-hearted fun, not for airing grievances or leveling accusations.Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I activate Ubuntu Pro
Greed is good.
π₯ Free for up to 5 machines π£
What are the benefits/features that this adds?
10 years security updates, plus security patches for community packages (instead of waiting on community patches). It's basically the corporate support plan provided for free for up to 5 machines per account.
I'm not sure I understand that part. Is Canonical implementing the patches instead of the open source project/package developers? I'm confused.
Exactly. In Debian, the community implements security patches. In Ubuntu, Canonical implements security patches for a part of the repo (main), the community implements them for the remainder (universe). This has been the standard since Ubuntu's inception. With Ubuntu Pro, Canonical implements security patches for the whole repo (main and universe).
So they're actively involved in the development of open source projects then?
Not necessarily. For all of these cases, Debian, Ubuntu, Pro, the community and Canonical are package maintainers. Implementing patches means means one of: grabbing a patch from upstream and applying it to a package (least work, no upstream contribution); deriving a patch for the package from the latest upstream source (more work, no upstream contribution); creating a fix that doesn't exist upstream and applying it to the package (most work, possible upstream contribution). I don't know what their internal process is for this last case but I imagine they publish fixes. I've definitely seen Canonical upstreaming bug fixes in GNOME, because that's where I have been paying attention to at some point in time. If you consider submitting such patches upstream as actively involved in project development, then they are actively involved. I probably wouldn't consider that active involvement just like I don't consider myself actively involved when I submit a bug fix to some project.
Ah ok I see. Thanks for the clarification.
Ubuntu is awesome Change my mind
Yeah, it's fine. Haven't had too much trouble in a good 10 odd years, once the WiFi drivers settled. Mind you I'm not fucking upgrading to 24.04 for another couple of weeks.
Spent a ton of time trying to install GrapheneOS because web USB doesn't work in snap version of chrome. How about letting me install the normal deb version? Nope, can't let the user choose
What's the hate with ubuntu? Or is it just elitism/gatekeeping?
Pretty much. Canonical made a few questionable choices in the past but overall they've done a lot for the Linux community. And their distro is very good. There is a reason why distros choose it as their base.