[ale] LTS doesn't always mean LTS

[David Tomaschik]

My understanding has always been that only 'main' is officially supported
by Canonical as part of the LTS effort.  Packages from other components
(i.e., universe) do not receive LTS support.

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 6:40 AM, Jim Kinney <jim.kinney at gmail.com> wrote:

> Ouch! That doesn't sound supported at all.
>
> Another in a growing list of why I don't use or recommend Ubuntu.
> In Ubuntu LTS, there's an issue with many packages not receiving security
> updates.
>
>
> https://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/ubuntu-lts-many-vulnerabilities-despite-long-term-support.385386/
> ====
> $ ubuntu-support-status --show-unsupported
> Support status summary of 'lubuntu':
>
> You have 196 packages (8.0%) supported until February 2015 (9m)
> You have 12 packages (0.5%) supported until January 2017 (9m)
> You have 1679 packages (68.8%) supported until May 2019 (5y)
> You have 148 packages (6.1%) supported until May 2017 (3y)
>
> You have 101 packages (4.1%) that can not/no-longer be downloaded
> You have 304 packages (12.5%) that are unsupported
>
> No longer downloadable:
>   <insert huge-ass-list> .......
>
> Unsupported:
>  <insert even-huger-huge-ass-list> .......
> ====
> Saw this and freaked out a little! 196 packages have lost support already
> on a
> 14.04 desktop.  Most are java and perl helpers. The perl stuff doesn't
> bother
> me, since I use perl-brew for all my real work in perl (never depend on the
> system perl stuff). But there are some ssh2, TLS, and qemu in that list
> too!
>
>     Supported until February 2015 (9m):
>     chromium-browser chromium-browser-l10n expect .... qemu-common
> libsqlite3-dev libssh2-1 libssh2-1-dev libssl-dev libgnutls-dev libgnutls28
> libgnutlsxx27
>
> A non-supported browser is a non-starter for me. This is on my primary
> desktop!
> Must do something about that, even if it means removal of the browser.
>
> to see which installed pkgs have and do not have support on your boxes.
> It basically comes down to which repository the packages are in.  Just
> something
> more to be aware about.
>
> Someone did the same thing for Debian and claimed that all the package
> security
> fixes were back ported to the "supported" releases.
>
> Lucy (Canonical), you got some 'splaning to do.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>
>


-- 
David Tomaschik
OpenPGP: 0x5DEA789B
https://systemoverlord.com
david at systemoverlord.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/ale/attachments/20160425/06677729/attachment.html>