[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/g/ - Technology


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: 1705959389020220.jpg (102 KB, 855x955)
102 KB JPG
Can someone explain to me why LTS distros can't ship modern desktops?
EPEL is able to ship relatively modern KDE to RHEL/Alma/Rocky.
And 0% of the stability is actually based on the version of the desktop being stuck. When people say LTS they mean that all non security related bugs stay as is for things like gcc or anything you might use on a server.
>>
Isn't basically toothache to update Alma/RHEL from a minor version to another one I.e. 10.1 to 10.2 if you use EPEL?
>>
>>108812063
>all non security related bugs stay
Pretty sure that serious bugs get fixed too even if there's no security risk, you just get to keep the minor bugs.
If a bug feels minor for the maintainers, but serious for you, you're probs relying on that package enough to consider whether switching to a non-LTS version would be viable for you. Could also patch the bug yourself, and set up your system to build the package from source in the future, and automatically applying the patch, if that's how you roll.
(I've patched multiple packages before, but I'm on Gentoo, where source-based is normal and patching is simple.)



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.