Page 4 of 4

Re: UP process change

Posted: 25 Feb 2014 12:36
by Arjen Balfoort

Code: Select all

sudo apt-get install myspell-pt-br

Re: UP process change

Posted: 25 Feb 2014 13:33
by Gonzalo_VC
Schoelje wrote:

Code: Select all

sudo apt-get install myspell-pt-br
Gee! I hate when I am caught in my ignorance :oops: I did check Synaptic for all those files... except myspell... (however I think I did... perhaps in another of my 10 machines with SolydXK :roll: ) I'm installing 2, right now.
THANKS! and sorry for the waste of your time, guys! :mrgreen:


Re: UP process change

Posted: 25 Feb 2014 17:44
by sumitb
@Schoelje: Any official word from you on KDE point releases? How are we actually managing these in SolydK? Can I expect point releases outside of update packs?

Sorry for being so desperate :)

Re: UP process change

Posted: 25 Feb 2014 18:53
by Arjen Balfoort
sumitb wrote:@Schoelje: Any official word from you on KDE point releases? How are we actually managing these in SolydK? Can I expect point releases outside of update packs?

Sorry for being so desperate :)
No, there will not be any KDE point releases.
The point of the new UP schedule was to relieve the testing team, and maintainers.

Re: UP process change

Posted: 25 Feb 2014 18:58
by Zill
sumitb wrote:...KDE point releases, like 4.11.x or 4.12.x, where only the x is changed, in my view should be part of the security updates that come in between of UPs. 3 months of time is major in such context and KDE team releases updates every month with critical security / other bug fixes. Not having these asap makes me shift in my seat a little...
I really think users need to keep these things in perspective. ;-)

IMHO, it is highly unlikely that any SolydXK user will become a victim of a critical security breach! While it is true that software is continually being updated to close security holes, the packages currently installed by SolydXK are already extremely secure.

When you consider that there are many millions of users out there running insecure systems based on, for example, Windows XP, who will the attackers go for? A handful of knowledgeable Linux users with their inherently secure systems or millions of naive Windows XP users?

If a Linux user is really that concerned about having the latest critical security fixes then, I suggest, they should really be running Debian Sid, rather than SolydXK. Just be aware that this will also bring a whole raft of other problems. ;-)

Re: UP process change

Posted: 25 Feb 2014 20:57
by kbd
If one is truly worried about getting all these updates ASAP there is always the ability to set sources to Testing or if that isn't quick enough--Sid ;-)

Re: UP process change

Posted: 25 Feb 2014 21:27
by kurotsugi

Code: Select all

kurotsugi@kurozv3:~$ apt-cache policy kde-runtime
kde-runtime:
  Installed: (none)
  Candidate: 4:4.12.1-90r0+b7
  Version table:
     4:4.12.1-90r0+b7 0
        500 http://packages.solydxk.com/production/ solydxk/kdenext amd64 Packages
     4:4.11.5-1 0
        500 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ unstable/main amd64 Packages
     4:4.11.3-1 0
        500 http://ftp.nl.debian.org/debian/ testing/main amd64 Packages
kurotsugi@kurozv3:~$ 
it seems that we have a different case here. even unstable is still have 4.11.5 at this time.
IMHO, it is highly unlikely that any SolydXK user will become a victim of a critical security breach! While it is true that software is continually being updated to close security holes, the packages currently installed by SolydXK are already extremely secure.
I'm afraid that I have to disagree with this one. IMO security patches should be applied immediately. the package maintainer should upgrade their package whenever a new security patch have been issued. nevertheless, we should remember that not every bug fixes is a security patch. it could also be a critical, high priority, or low priority bug fixes. in a DE it would be very rare to see a security patch. I've seen a lot kernel security patch or browser security patch but personally I never saw a DE security patch. that's why I said that DE isn't part of security update. on most occasion, minor version update usually only contain low priority patches. it's up the package maintainer to decide whether if he should upgrade his package or not.

Re: UP process change

Posted: 25 Feb 2014 21:42
by Zill
kurotsugi wrote:
IMHO, it is highly unlikely that any SolydXK user will become a victim of a critical security breach! While it is true that software is continually being updated to close security holes, the packages currently installed by SolydXK are already extremely secure.
I'm afraid that I have to disagree with this one. IMO security patches should be applied immediately. the package maintainer should upgrade their package whenever a new security patch have been issued...
So, how many SolydXK users do you consider there are who have actually been a victim of any Linux security vulnerability? If there are any such users reading this thread then please advise - it would be interesting to count them up.

Re: UP process change

Posted: 25 Feb 2014 22:12
by kurotsugi
if you have a security hole and your system got breached on most cases you won't notice it :lol:
the right question will be "is there any unpatched security bug in solydxk?" i believe there isn't any. both debian and solydxk have done a good job keeping solydxk as a secure OS. lowering the build quality simply not an option.

Re: UP process change

Posted: 26 Feb 2014 02:49
by sumitb
I was basically not referring to these point releases as security updates, but i guess I chose the wrong words. KDE team is doing bug fixes and releasing "fixpack" kind of point releases every month. Keeping up with them is something I would prefer, but its not a deal breaker as mostly these "fixes" aren't really visible for most of my use cases. So its ok, just wanted to get clarification from team. :)

Re: UP process change

Posted: 15 Mar 2014 07:31
by Juanmi
Another Ubuntu-like distro... It is a shame.
Bye

Re: UP process change

Posted: 15 Mar 2014 10:52
by ane champenois
Juanmi wrote:Another Ubuntu-like distro... It is a shame.
Bye
I hope you'll find your way in another distro.

Re: UP process change

Posted: 16 Mar 2014 19:59
by igor83
ane champenois wrote:
Juanmi wrote:Another Ubuntu-like distro... It is a shame.
Bye
I hope you'll find your way in another distro.
What people forget is that not only does Ubuntu have a nine-month delay between updates, but there is also something called feature freeze that cuts off any new program versions from making their way into the release. For example, Wesnoth released version 1.10.7 about two months prior to Ubuntu 13.10, but it was not included in Ubuntu 13.10 due to feature freeze. Instead, Ubuntu opted to distribute a year-old version of Wesnoth, without any of the current bug-fixes. Meanwhile, SolydXK has Wesnoth 1.10.7 ready to roll.

So the choice is between Solyd X/K, with software becoming a maximum of 3.5 months old, or Ubuntu, with software becoming 11 or more months old. Ubuntu releases between the long-term, 5-year releases tend to be pretty buggy, so really Ubuntu users that pick up the enthusiast releases, for the sake of being up-to-date, can be regarded as beta-testers. Get ready to submit those crash reports to Canonical and reboot your computer.

Re: UP process change

Posted: 19 Mar 2014 20:15
by Gonzalo_VC
[/userbar][/userbar]
Schoelje wrote:...
To further increase security both Firefox and Thunderbird are being built from source if there are new versions available.

I think this is a good time!
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Mozilla- ... 3030.shtml
"A large number of security issues have been fixed for Firefox during the latest Pwn2Own 2014 event."


Re: UP process change

Posted: 10 Apr 2014 23:17
by gazza
patzy wrote: If the 3 months system works out how about aiming for a two monthly cycle for 2015 and getting back to one every month for 2016. Note that this would be a goal and not set in stone.

Of course it would all depend on getting a lot of support both in time and donations from users, but I am sure that if the aim of getting back to monthly upgrades was made known then users would rally round to help where they can.
I'm a lazy user and the reason I chose this OS is because I don't have to muck around fixing constant breakages.

When I first got Solydx it was monthly. It seemed to me that every month I'd find an app that was totally broken. A little annoying, but usually the next month found it fixed. I'm not here to discuss alternate apps I have my choices so the examples I give are not for discussion, it's the idiology I'm pointing at.

Under the old 1 month system and using the Januaury spin, I lost totem, and skype is very buggy with sound, I have to resort to booting a different OS when I want to skype.

Under the old UP I would have expected totem working again by the Feb spin or possibly the Mar spin. Same with Skype.

Unfortunately now I hope that in a few days the new spin will have these fixed (crossing fingers). a wait of 3 months.

I am in total agreement with the move to 3 monthly under the current environment. It makes sense and only shows the the project is being lead by a responsible and caring person. I do know what it's like to burn out as a tester having done a little on the now defunct Solusos.

But it would be nice if the "goal" as described by patzy would be considered as resouces become available. One month spins have their advantages when it comes to applications that break their libs for a short period in order to deal with some major issue.

Just thought I'd throw my 2 cents in. An advertised Goal with "conditions" may well create an enviroment where the users start contributing more if they think the Goal is worth it.

Re: UP process change

Posted: 10 Apr 2014 23:44
by zerozero
gazza
not discussing the choice of applications, far from me such idea, only addressing 2 questions you raised above
maybe this http://forums.solydxk.nl/viewtopic.php? ... ype#p32131 will help with skype (it's a bit of a shoot in the dark but :) )
totem is installable in an up-to-date SolydX install so the issue must come from some other incompatibility.
if you decide to open a new topic to tackle this down providing the output of

Code: Select all

apt install totem
we will be more than happy to help you.

===
regarding the main point in your post: all options are possible, we, first, need a bigger team (specially someone or someones to share the dev load) and then other goals can be considered.

Re: UP process change

Posted: 10 Apr 2014 23:52
by Gonzalo_VC
I never have that much broken!
And even with a 3 month cycle, if something is broken after an upgrade, the team won't wait 3 more months to release a correction, that would be done in a couple of days. It's a whole different issue.