Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 24th Nov 2010 17:58 UTC, submitted by visitor
Permalink for comment 451202
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-11-12
1. Developers have to provide backports for every single release. When they can't be bothered you're out of luck.
2. It's Ubuntu specific.
3. There's a reason why the update menu item in Firefox was disabled on Linux when it wasn't on Windows and Mac OS. It just looks stupid. "
1. Developers have to provide "backports" for windows XP, 2003, vista and the various editions of them too. It the same thing for Linux, just choose the oldest release you want to support and make packages for it, then fix any problems when installing them on newer releases. If you require any newer libraries on Linux they can be bundled.
2. Ubuntu was just an example, fedora and OpenSuse works in a similar maner. Covering them is probably enough.
3. As I said, they should hook it up with the built in package management, there is no need to provide an included update application when the OS already provide the required functionality. The technology is there, if they choose to use it.