On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 02:10:58PM +0100, Markus Wanner wrote:
> On 02/19/2013 01:03 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Adding to this complexity, I just realized that the Ubuntu code names
> > are different from the Debian code names, even though Ubuntu is based on
> > Debian.
>
> Guys, this code name bashing is starting to get ridiculous. Some people
> are better at remembering names, others are better at memorizing
> numbers. So where's the big deal?
>
> I myself firmly belong to the first group, having trouble remembering my
> own phone number. That's why I barely have an idea of what Debian or
> Ubuntu version *number* I'm using. But I know for certain that I'm
> running squeeze (or wheezy, on more experimental machines or newish
> hardware) and precise (and yes, I know it's an LTS version).
>
> Of course, numbers have more intrinsic information. But what use is
> knowing that 4 follows 3 if you don't remember whether you are on
> version 3 or 4? (Not to mention numbering gaps, major vs. minor version
> number increments, and similar marketing non-sense.)
>
> For mates in my group: here's the command (of about equal complexity) to
> find out your "release number":
>
> $lsb_release --short --release
> 7.0
My only point is that we assumed the user knew the release names to
install the software, and often they don't, and we didn't tell them how
to find out.
I have no problems with the use of code names.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
