Anyone use ubuntu 7.10

Yeah I just noticed this release. So is anyone using it. Do you think it is worth the upgrade. Is it any better from the previous version?

[jbennet]

Dont know about ubuntu but I went from debian etch (installed on release day, never updated) to debian sid (current) (i believe each release of ubuntu is based on a snapshot of sid) and it braught a lot of improvements in hardware compatibility and stablity, especially on laptops

[Sturm]

Yeah... new kernels seem to work wonders on laptops...

[jbennet]

newer kernels = better laptop battery life too

(they changed the way it "ticks")

why not download 7.10 and then burn + try it out in livecd mode and if you like it, then upgrade (i think you can do that from the cd?)

[TheZert]

Yah, I got the new 'n installed on my Dell M1330 and most everything worked out of the box. Saved me alot of time :)

Yeah, I might do that bennet, it's just that I'll have to set my system up again, i.e configure the graphics cards, user accounts, printers, LAMP, media players.

[jbennet]

i thaught it kept all your stuff?

I don't get what you mean? Doesn't it wipe the old system?

[jbennet]

dont think so.

I went from one version of redhat to another using the CD and didnt lose any of my users or home directories, so i assume debian-based distros are the same.

[TheNNS]

iamthwee

upgrading to 7.10 is as easy as clicking a button.
http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/upgrading
this tutorial is pretty simple.

[Ashish Barot]

Yeah I just noticed this release. So is anyone using it. Do you think it is worth the upgrade. Is it any better from the previous version?

Yes Dear,

you will definately enjoy it.

I am sure about it, i am using it.

With Regards,
Ashish Barot.

[tl2050]

Ubuntu is the mac of linux. Really. The slogan is even "it just works." Thats not bad at all if you're trying to convince people from the mac and windows base, but if you already like using linux...fuck ubuntu. Don't get me wrong, I'm using it on my laptop, and it works perfectly (it'll even automount my "windows only" mp3 player). Ubuntu has a huge user base, so if you need help, its out there. But really, if you're going to be putting it on a computer you want to actually work on, use slackware or debian

P.S. To actually answer your question, there are a few serious improvements as far as non-free drivers being automatically handled by synaptic, and it comes with compiz-fusion installed, but there are also some pieces that worked in .04 that don't work on certain configs this time 'round.

When you say use slackware or debian at least offer reasons why it is better than ubuntu.

[jbennet]

IMHO debian is more stable (ubuntu is based on debian sid which is the devel branch) and is faster (and yes, this is from experience - debian uses like 1/2 the ram)

if deboandidnt exist , ubuntu wouldnt (just as fedora needs RH and SuSE needs novell)

[TheNNS]

in slackware, you have to configure everything, recompile the kernel, bla bla bla, so after installation process is complete, you have faster system, but it's not worth it to some people to spend all that time installing it.

can't debian run on like 16MB or ram?

[John A]

>in slackware, you have to configure everything, recompile the kernel
Last time I checked, Slackware came with a prebuilt kernel, and one file needed to be changed to get a GUI login window.

>bla bla bla
I don't quite understand what you're referring to here. Care to elaborate?

>so after installation process is complete, you have faster system, but it's not worth it to some
>people to spend all that time installing it.
While some people may find a text-based installer challenging, the reality is, it's not much different from Debian's standard installer. And it's not a long installation process either, usually faster than Ubuntu.

>can't debian run on like 16MB or ram?
I've almost got it running on a 5MB machine. Only problem was that the initrd file was too large (and I haven't gotten around to making a smaller one).

[jbennet]

in slackware, you have to configure everything, recompile the kernel, bla bla bla, so after installation process is complete, you have faster system, but it's not worth it to some people to spend all that time installing it.

can't debian run on like 16MB or ram?

The installer and X need 24mb ram. A srandard desktop + gnome uses about 40-90mb ram when idle, so it runs well on older PCs

[Ubuntu]

let me say here if maybe any body have this problem after upgrading to ubuntu 7.10 .

some users after upgrade , told that their boot screen was blank and boot process take more than 3 minute until login screen .

if you have this problem do this :

Open Terminal and type this command :

sudo gedit /boot/grub/menu.lst

when menu.lst opened , find this :

## ## End Default Options ##

title Ubuntu 7.10, kernel 2.6.22-14-generic
root (hd0,2)
kernel /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.22-14-generic root=UUID=79b1afc9-1898-45b2-a4e4-c53dd8e67db7 ro quiet splash

and change the splash to unsplash and save the file .

one of my friend told me after doing it , his boot process change from 4 min to 15 second ....

hope you never have this problem , i said this because many user haved it ...

----------------------
it's 4 day that i am upgraded in ubuntu 7.10 and it's so much better and faster .

[Ashish Barot]

iamthwee

upgrading to 7.10 is as easy as clicking a button.
http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/upgrading
this tutorial is pretty simple.

Yes

you are right.
it is too much easy for anyone.

Thanks this will help lots of guys.