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 _______________________________________________ Toybox mailing list Toybox@lists.landley.net http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net