[Toybox] Canonical Extending Ubuntu 14.04/16.04 LTS Support To Ten Years - Phoronix

[Rob Landley]

On 9/21/21 8:18 PM, enh via Toybox wrote:
> Ironically I couldn't find a canonical source for this, but a couple of other
> sites have a similar story (but different enough to make me think there really
> is a Canonical press release doing the rounds). 

https://ubuntu.com/blog/ubuntu-14-04-and-16-04-lifecycle-extended-to-ten-years

> https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Ubuntu-14.04-16.04-Ten-Years&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Phoronix+%28Phoronix%29
> <https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Ubuntu-14.04-16.04-Ten-Years&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Phoronix+%28Phoronix%29> 
> 
> TIL: Ubuntu LTS is 10 years, not 3.

It was 5 when I moved off 14.04 (the last non-systemd version going out of
support), but there was talk of moving it to 7?

> I guess Ubuntu 14/16 are the new CentOSes...

Chasing taillights. Only took 'em 8 years:

https://access.redhat.com/articles/69646

Sigh. I acknowledge the industry pressure for a big round number based on how
many fingers salespeople have, the problem is if you're trying to gain a market
advantage by advertising a longer support horizon than the competition it's not
likely to STOP there.

Luckily, I"m mostly programming against C99 and trying to implement Posix-2008
so it's not a LARGE impact. Mostly it's things like the openat() system calls
still being fleshed out in places.

Meanwhile, "rust" is held to an entirely different standard:

https://lwn.net/Articles/869557

And they're working hard to make sure you can't build a kernel without it:

https://lwn.net/Articles/869145/
https://lwn.net/Articles/869317/
https://lwn.net/Articles/869428/

Grumble grumble perl removal patches...

Rob