[00:07] <mcclurken> I'm attempting to install Ubuntu Server 18.04 and am having trouble configuring filesystems, with or without LVM.Is the general idea to switch out to the shell to create filesystems?
[00:09] <sarnold> there's a few different installers, and some of them iirc make it easier or harder to do block storage things..
[00:09] <sarnold> but I'd expect most tasks to be possiuble within the interface
[00:17] <mcclurken> I've tried several different approaches. I can't create filesystems within the automatic LVM config, tried falling back to just partitions and such and ended up creating a partition for everything (/, /home, /usr etc)
[00:17] <mcclurken> I'm missing the old ncurses debian installer
[00:18] <sarnold> that's still around
[00:20] <sarnold> hmm. this doesn't *say* anywhere that it's the old one.. http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/releases/18.04.1/release/ but that's the link from "Download the alternate installer" on https://www.ubuntu.com/download/alternative-downloads
[00:24] <mcclurken> I'll give that a shot. It wasn't clear to me since the filename doesn't mention anything so it looks like the regular one.
[00:26] <mcclurken> I guess the hint is its missing the "live"
[00:27] <sarnold> oh is that the tell? heh
[11:32] <kstenerud_> How do I report multipass bugs?
[11:36] <RoyK> multipass?
[11:40] <ogra> kstenerud_, try asiking in #multipass
[11:41] <ogra> RoyK, https://snapcraft.io/multipass
[11:44] <RoyK> ogra: oh - another docker-ish thing? ;)
[11:45] <ogra> not at all :)
[11:45] <ogra> its an OS agnostic VM tool (also runs on win and macos)
[11:45] <ogra> no containers involved ;)
[11:45] <RoyK> what's underneath? kvm?
[11:46] <ogra> you have to ask the devs :)
[11:47] <kstenerud_> It's to VMs what lxd is to containers
[11:47] <kstenerud_> in beta atm
[11:48] <kstenerud_> kvm
[11:49] <RoyK> ogra: libvirt or qemu afaics, looking at src/platform/backends
[11:49] <RoyK> and IIRC libvirt uses qemu and is just another abstaction later on top of it
[11:50] <RoyK> and qemu may use kvm if the arch supports it
[11:50] <kstenerud_> yup, and multipass gives it all a nicer UI with similar commands to lxd
[11:50] <RoyK> gotta take a closer look at it some time
[11:52] <kstenerud_> container: lxc launch ubuntu:cosmic blah
[11:52] <kstenerud_> VM: multipass launch --name blah cosmic
[11:53] <RoyK> how does multipass deal with networking?
[11:53] <RoyK> I have a bridge (br0) setup on my home server now for kvm/libvirt use with some VMs
[11:53] <kstenerud_> I'm not really sure - I'm just getting started with it myself.
[11:54] <RoyK> ok
[11:54] <kstenerud_> you can pass it --cloud-init <file>
[11:54] <ogra> you should really ask in #multipass ... i dont think any of the guys working on it is around in this channel
[11:55] <kstenerud_> Found their github issues page so all is good
[11:55] <ogra> well, they should mention the issue link in the snap description ... or in the contact field of the snap
[11:56] <kstenerud_> Nope, there's no contact link in the snap unfortunately
[11:57] <ogra> thats what i mean :)
[11:57] <ogra> tell them in the #multipass channel ;)
[11:59] <ahasenack> good morning
[11:59] <ahasenack> rbasak: hi, any idea why it's blacklisted?
[12:27] <ahasenack> rbasak, around?
[12:33] <rbasak> ahasenack: we avoided importing the kernel as it's too big and they have their own workflow (ownership of the default repository in Launchpad)
[12:34] <rbasak> I'm not sure about linux-meta specifically
[12:34] <ahasenack> linux-meta is ~150kb uncompressed
[12:35] <rbasak> Understood, but it might have been dragged in with the "leave the kernel for now" direction
[12:35] <rbasak> nacc: ^ do you remember anything about linux-meta?
[12:37] <ahasenack> it was added in the first revision of the blacklist file
[12:38] <ahasenack> hm, but it was in b/gitubuntu/source-package-whitelist.txt
[12:38] <ahasenack> commented
[12:38] <rbasak> I'm keen to avoid stepping on the kernel team's toes.
[12:38] <ahasenack> found the change
[12:38] <ahasenack>     usd-cron-packages.txt: blacklist kernel packages
[12:39] <rbasak> But if there's OK with it (including the takeover of the default repository on Launchpad for the Ubuntu package), I can't think of any other reason to not import it.
[12:39] <ahasenack> well, ok, another question
[12:39] <ahasenack> different topic
[12:39] <ahasenack> acpid, removing it from server seed
[12:39] <ahasenack> how can I check if it won't be demoted to unverse after that?
[12:39] <rbasak> germinate-output?
[12:40] <rbasak> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/germinate-output/ubuntu.disco/rdepends/acpid/acpid
[12:40] <rbasak> Looks like desktop also hold it in main
[12:41] <ahasenack> I see
[12:41] <ahasenack> via acpi-support
[12:41] <ahasenack> which is what pupolates /etc/acpi/events
[12:41] <ahasenack> i.e., all the scripts for wifi buttons, keyboard backlight, etc
[12:42] <ahasenack> but that's a recommends
[12:42] <ahasenack> is that "strong" enough?
[12:52] <ahasenack> rbasak: ^
[12:53] <rbasak> ahasenack: I believe so
[12:57] <ahasenack> rbasak: after the seed change, how is the ubuntu-server metapackage (from ubuntu-meta src) updated?
[12:57] <ahasenack> I see an "update" script in it
[12:57] <rbasak> ahasenack: ubuntu-meta needs the update running and re-uploading, yes.
[12:58] <ahasenack> ok
[12:58] <ahasenack> any particular order this needs to happen? seed change vs meta package change?
[12:58] <rbasak> Seed change first IIRC
[12:58] <ahasenack> looks like it indeed, given the script
[12:58] <ahasenack> thx
[12:59] <rbasak> The update script fetches the seeds to then update the ubuntu-meta sources
[12:59] <rbasak> Might be worth double checking the plan in #ubuntu-devel - I don't do this very often.
[12:59] <ahasenack> rbasak: any opinion versus removing acpid entirely, or moving it to server-ship as a first step?
[12:59] <rbasak> I don't see any need for it to be in server-ship, since I don't see that it would be affected by any bootstrapping issues.
[13:00] <ahasenack> ok
[13:00] <rbasak> I say drop it unless someone comes up with a reason to keep it.
[13:00] <rbasak> And we'll hopefully get reports with reasons we're wrong before the next LTS.
[13:00] <rbasak> (preferably before the next release!)
[13:00] <rbasak> And if necessary we can re-add but with a comment explaining why this time.
[13:57] <openfire> Any downside to disabling netplan on bionic and manually configuring networkd?
[13:57] <cyphermox> openfire: no, you're free to do so if you want
[13:58] <cyphermox> just don't specify the interface in /etc/netplan
[13:58] <openfire> Ah, so I don't even need to remove the package. That makes sense, thank you.
[14:05] <Mr_Pan> !0d5
[14:22] <zetheroo> I installed a second disk in a Windows 10 system and installed Ubuntu Server 18.04 on it, but on boot there is no grub menu and thus no way to select which OS to boot into. At the moment Ubuntu is booting.
[14:23] <zetheroo> I have tried manually entering the details into /etc/grub.d/40_custom and running update-grub but that's not working for me. os-prober shows /dev/sdb1:Windows 10:Windows:chain
[14:23] <zetheroo> Should I be using the uuid of /dev/sdb1 in  /etc/grub.d/40_custom?
[14:27] <TJ-> zetheroo: if the system is using UEFI, then GRUB isn't responsible for choosing, it is the PC firmware boot manager itself. It should have 2 entries added when Ubuntu was installed, and usually Ubuntu is set to the default. It sounds like that hasn't happened. The alternative is you booted the Ubuntu installer in CSM/Legacy BIOS mode, and so was installed that way, in which case you'll need to use the
[14:27] <TJ-> PC's boot manager to choose to boot CSM/Legacy mode from the 2nd disk
[14:30] <zetheroo> I got the grub menu to show up by pressing SHIFT during boot, but is there a way to make it always show automatically at boot?
[14:31] <mason> zetheroo: Have a GRUB_TIMEOUT, and don't set GRUB_TIMEOUT_STYLE, is what I do.
[14:33] <zetheroo> mason: ok
[14:33] <zetheroo> TJ-: I'm fairly certain I installed Ubuntu with Legacy and not UEFI
[14:34] <zetheroo> I'm also pretty sure that when I installed Windows 10 on this server I didn't use UEFI either
[14:35] <TJ-> zetheroo: oh, so there is a GRUB menu, it was just hidden!
[14:37] <zetheroo> Server bios boot mode is set to dual
[14:37] <kstenerud_> for a changelog message, I'm wondering what to put in the changelog when I changed multiple files
[14:38] <kstenerud_> Normally it's d/p/some.patch, but what if I modified a bunch of files in debian/
[14:38] <zetheroo> yes, I pressed SHIFT right before boot and the grub menu showed up
[14:39] <DammitJim> I still don't understand the difference between apt-get purge vs apt-get remove
[14:39] <DammitJim> does purge do a remove as well?
[14:40] <sdeziel> DammitJim: yes but purge leaves no old conf behind
[14:41] <zetheroo> TJ-: this is what I have in /etc/grub.d/40_custom /etc/grub.d/40_custom
[14:41] <zetheroo> https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/dHD7Kc5yX4/
[14:42] <zetheroo> TJ-: that's the uuid from /dev/sdb2 but I have also tried the uuid from /dev/sdb1
[14:47] <zetheroo> why doesn't Startup Disk Creator let you select other iso's than Ubuntu iso's?
[15:03] <zetheroo> try SGD now
[15:09] <zetheroo> no luck
[15:17] <zetheroo> this is what I am getting when trying to boot into Windows from the grub menu https://ibb.co/fRCUOL
[15:24] <kstenerud_> rbasak: https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/5MhXY6WR59/
[15:24] <kstenerud_> So 3 files changed
[15:32] <rbasak> kstenerud_: how about: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/gY9RWGRF88/
[15:32] <rbasak> kstenerud_: the diff itself looks great BTW, thanks.
[15:37] <kstenerud_> cool thanks!
[16:01] <zetheroo> bios boot mode changed from Dual to Legacy - Fresh install of Ubuntu 18.04 completed - boots straight into Ubuntu with no grub menu
[16:01] <zetheroo>  https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/sXc55gBnp6/
[16:13] <mason> zetheroo: My recommendation remains.
[16:14] <zetheroo> mason: getting to the grub menu is not really the issue ... but that there is no Windows to boot from in the grub menu
[16:14] <nacc> rbasak: ahasenack: looking
[16:14] <zetheroo> should grub be installed on the Ubuntu disk only, or also on the Windows disk?
[16:15] <zetheroo> boot-repair is asking me where to install grub
[16:15] <zetheroo> I'm thinking only on the Ubuntu disk
[16:18] <nacc> rbasak: ahasenack: right the binaries those packages create are all kernel-team owned, afaict
[16:19] <mason> zetheroo: GRUB should be installed on whatever disk you want to boot from, and it should have an entry for whatever system you want to boot. If you have the option of UEFI/SecureBoot, you want that.
[16:20] <mason> What it needs to look like on-disk depends on whether you're going for UEFI or legacy.
[16:21] <zetheroo> mason: grub installed on Ubuntu disk - rebooted and grub menu shows no Windows
[16:22] <zetheroo> This is the pastebin from boot-repair https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/Cd2cXWg9NR/
[16:25] <zetheroo> any ideas?
[16:26] <zetheroo> Should I switch the Boot Mode in bios to UEFI?
[16:27] <zetheroo> if I do, do I have to reinstall Ubuntu?
[16:36] <zetheroo> UEFI enabled and nothing boots
[16:36] <zetheroo> I just end up at this screen showing a list of disks and Shell>
[16:37] <zetheroo> switching back to Legacy and seeing if Windows boots at all if I select it's disk as the primary boot disk ... Ubuntu boots :/
[16:37] <mason> zetheroo: https://askubuntu.com/questions/110698/add-windows-to-my-boot-menu seems relevant
[16:37] <zetheroo> https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/rqJJrKhmy6/
[17:04] <zetheroo> so why doesn't Ubuntu add Windows to the grub menu during install?
[17:06] <openfire> What's the contents of the actual grub.cfg file?
[17:08] <zetheroo> is it in here? https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/Cd2cXWg9NR/
[17:09] <zetheroo> I'm booting back into Ubuntu now
[17:10] <openfire> Are you mounting the Windows partition before running update-grub?
[17:10] <zetheroo> openfire: no
[17:10] <openfire> So mount the windows partition, and run 'update-grub'. Not grub-mkconfig.
[17:11] <zetheroo> how do I mount the windows partition? I mean ... do I just mount it anywhere?
[17:12] <zetheroo> and which partition do I mount?
[17:12] <zetheroo> there are 3
[17:12] <zetheroo> https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/FtjKFTCcnz/
[17:13] <openfire> I think it'll be the second one, if memory serves. The largest one.
[17:13] <openfire> And I usually mount it to '/mnt/windows' or something.
[17:13] <openfire> And DEFINITELY mount it as read-only.
[17:14] <zetheroo> can you help me with a mount command for r/o?
[17:15] <openfire> man mount will tell you that.
[17:15] <zetheroo> and this mount is just temporary right?
[17:15] <openfire> It has to be there whenever you run update-grub.
[17:17] <zetheroo> ok mounted
[17:19] <zetheroo> https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/f25gvJSnYW/
[17:21] <openfire> That's not grub.cfg.
[17:21] <openfire> And I also didn't tell you to mount more than one Windows partition. :/
[17:22] <zetheroo> openfire: with sdb3 unmounted it's the same output
[17:23] <TJ-> zetheroo: mounts are not required; os-prober does that. The problem seems to be that /etc/grub.d/30_os-prover is either disabled or not betting the message
[17:23] <TJ-> grrr s/30_os-prover/30_os-prober/
[17:23] <openfire> I thought it had to be mounted somewhere to be found. My mistake, then.
[17:24] <TJ-> zetheroo: do you have "GRUB_DISABLE_OS_PROBER=true" in /etc/default/grub
[17:24] <TJ-> openfire: no, it scans all block devices (unless config options prevent it)
[17:25] <openfire> Filing that away, thank you.,
[17:25] <zetheroo> here is the grub file https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/7rqx28PrQ6/
[17:26] <openfire> zetheroo: grep GRUB_DISABLE_OS_PROBER /etc/default/grub
[17:26] <openfire> is it true or false?
[17:26] <zetheroo> nothing
[17:26] <zetheroo> false
[17:26] <zetheroo> where is the grub.cfg?
[17:29] <zetheroo> found it https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/YSNhFRxty8/
[17:30] <TJ-> zetheroo: let's debug the script. "pastebinit <( sudo sh -x /usr/sbin/grub-mkconfig 2>&1 )"
[17:31] <zetheroo> http://paste.ubuntu.com/p/PBPrxK7JQK/
[17:32] <nacc> GRUB_DISABLE_OS_PROBER=true ?
[17:32] <nacc> from /etc/default/grub.d/50-curtin-settings.cfg
[17:33] <zetheroo> nacc: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/pyDssTg4QN/
[17:33] <TJ-> nacc: indeed, I thought it'd be there somewhere :)
[17:33] <TJ-> zetheroo: there you go, disabled :)
[17:33] <nacc> yeah, you can't have that and dual boot, zetheroo
[17:33] <nacc> dunno why it's set that way, tbh
[17:33] <zetheroo> no way :/
[17:34] <zetheroo> so ... comment it out?
[17:34] <nacc> zetheroo: how did you install this system?
[17:34] <zetheroo> nacc: from installer - fresh install
[17:34] <zetheroo> USB bootable
[17:34] <nacc> zetheroo: which installer?
[17:34] <TJ-> zetheroo: which release of Ubuntu is it, too?
[17:35] <nacc> (and what version of ubuntu is this?)
[17:35] <nacc> yeah
[17:35] <nacc> my fresh 18.04 desktop has no such file
[17:35] <zetheroo> ubuntu-18.04.1-live-server-amd64
[17:35] <nacc> you installed server side by side with windows?
[17:35] <nacc> i'm not sure that's mean to be supported by default :) (without some extra steps)
[17:36] <nacc> *meant
[17:37] <zetheroo> ok, so what's the best solution now
[17:37] <zetheroo> ?
[17:37] <zetheroo> should I change that to =false?
[17:38] <zetheroo> and run os-prober and update-grub again?
[17:38] <nacc> TJ-: --^ I'm not sure. I think that should be fine, but this is an odd setup to me.
[17:39] <TJ-> zetheroo: If the curtin package gets updated it might return. I'd use "dpkg-divert" to permanently move the file so it doesn't get read at all by grub
[17:39] <zetheroo> TJ-: ok, never heard of that. what's the full command?
[17:40] <TJ-> nacc: seems pretty 'normal' to me; When we lost the alternate installer it was said the server installer would do everything it did so was un-necessary. Seems like the server installer team have forgot it is supposed to be a fallback for those that cannot run the desktop live installer (often due to graphics/video problems)
[17:42] <nacc> TJ-: ah could be. smoser --^ ? this seems like a corner case that should be more obvious
[17:42] <TJ-> zetheroo: "sudo dpkg-divert --divert /etc/default/grub.d/50-curtin-settings.cfg.disabled --rename /etc/default/grub.d/50-curtin-settings.cfg"
[17:43] <zetheroo> done
[17:43] <zetheroo> do I still need to edit the config?
[17:43] <TJ-> zetheroo: no, just "sudo update-grub"
[17:44] <TJ-> zetheroo: that config file is no longer going to be read by grub
[17:44] <zetheroo> ok, and os-prober?
[17:44] <TJ-> zetheroo: even if curtin package upgrades, it'll upgrade the new filename, which grub ignores
[17:44] <zetheroo> cool
[17:44] <TJ-> zetheroo: os-prober is called by grub automatically
[17:45] <zetheroo> gosh ... all the things I didn't know
[17:45] <zetheroo> https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/DvHsSVzzcR/
[17:45] <zetheroo> hey that looks better
[17:45] <zetheroo> is that it ... or?
[17:45] <zetheroo> is it safe to reboot?
[17:45] <TJ-> zetheroo: now you just have to work out which one to boot!
[17:46] <zetheroo> oh
[17:46] <TJ-> zetheroo: that's it :)
[17:46] <zetheroo> sdb2 is the largest partition ... so I have to do anything more manually?
[17:46] <TJ-> zetheroo: *usually* the 1st entry is the Windows recovery partition
[17:46] <zetheroo> ok
[17:46] <zetheroo> do you suppose the grub menu will be shown at boot now?
[17:48] <zetheroo> TJ-: anything else I should do before rebooting?
[17:48] <TJ-> zetheroo: you have to tap Esc (or hold Shift) to reveal it. You can change the /etc/default/grub options to make it display always
[17:48] <zetheroo> TJ-: I would prefer it always popped up
[17:50] <TJ-> zetheroo: I think you'd add "GRUB_TIMEOUT_STYLE=menu" and then "sudo update-grub" again
[17:50] <zetheroo> its GRUB_TIMEOUT_STYLE=hidden atm
[17:50] <TJ-> zetheroo: and ensure the *TIMEOUT= values are not 0 !
[17:51] <zetheroo> GRUB_TIMEOUT=10
[17:51] <zetheroo> ok, done and done
[17:51] <zetheroo> reboot? :)
[17:52] <TJ-> zetheroo: your choice :p
[17:52] <zetheroo> ok, fire in the hole
[17:52] <zetheroo> all my fingers and toes are crossed :D
[17:54] <zetheroo> grub menu with Windows OS shows up !!!
[17:55] <zetheroo> there are two Windows OS entries .. the first one boots into Windows 10
[17:56] <zetheroo> the second one also boots into Windows 10
[17:56] <zetheroo> well .. better two that work than none ;)
[17:58] <cryptonix2> zetheroo: nice
[18:01] <smoser> we are aware of the pain of /etc/default/grub.d/50-curtin-settings.cfg
[18:01] <smoser> if you do not like it's effects on things, it is safe to remove it.
[18:02] <zetheroo> ok, well thanks all for your help with this. No way I would have found this out.
[18:03] <nacc> smoser: ack :)
[18:03] <nacc> smoser: is there a bug tracking it as a pain point?
[18:04] <smoser> byes
[18:04] <smoser> yes even
[18:04] <smoser> https://bugs.launchpad.net/curtin/+bug/1635181
[18:05] <nacc> smoser: ack thanks, zetheroo --^ fyi
[18:05] <zetheroo> nacc ok
[18:23] <teward> the server installers don't have a "side by side" install option, right?
[18:23] <teward> if I remember right that's a Desktop-only installer function
[18:24] <nacc> teward: i believe that is correct
[18:28] <teward> that's what I thought
[18:40] <RoyK> the GRUB_TIMEOUT=0 that ubuntu server has, is rather peculiar - for a desktop or laptop, sure, but if you're setting up a server, you know sufficient already not to be scared by the linux boot screen - if not - you'll learn that after a short while
[18:41] <ahasenack> RoyK: +1
[18:41] <ahasenack> I also always have a problem with that, specially in VMs, where getting the timing right is super hard
[18:41] <ahasenack> and "shift" isn't the best key in that case
[18:44] <RoyK> the main reason I don't use ubuntu too much on servers anymore, is that ubuntu really focuses a lot on the desktop, not on server/stability - so I had my Debian relapse ;)
[18:53]  * openfire looks at the extremely large server estate that he runs, a mix of 16.04 and 18.04.
[18:54] <openfire> Not on servers or stability, huh?
[19:05] <nacc> RoyK: yeah that's pretty FUD-y to me too :)
[19:06] <RoyK> nacc: it's not ;)
[19:07] <openfire> Yes, it is.
[19:07] <openfire> It's total BS, to be completely blunt.
[19:07] <RoyK> oh well, famous holy wars etc
[19:07] <nacc> RoyK: "ubuntu really focuses a lot on the desktop, not on server/stability" is FUD. You are basing it upon .... nothing?
[19:07] <nacc> RoyK: look at relative contributions, and stop abscribing your epxerience to a distribution (which can't "focus" on anytihng, because it's not a person, anyways)
[19:08] <openfire> It's not a war. You're full of crap, end of story.
[19:08] <openfire> There are several solid server distributions out there. Ubuntu IS one of them. To say it isn't is FUD.
[19:08] <RoyK> nacc: experience - quite a few years of it - I moved to ubuntu from debian back in 2008 or thereabout and moved back some 4-5 years back because of quite a few bugs I posted that was never fixed - same thing worked well on debian
[19:09] <openfire> https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal
[19:09] <openfire> ONE thing didn't work for you. So that magically translates to "Ubuntu doesn't focus on server or stability."
[19:09] <openfire> As my old CO used to say, "That dog don't hunt."
[19:20] <RoyK> the particular problem I was stuck on back then, was nested RAIDs - a bug that was never solved until a new release came out
[19:21] <RoyK> the main problem, as far as I can see, with ubuntu server, is that it tosses in a lot of packages that aren't really ready or well-integrated, where in debian and centos, you get a system that is more balanced
[19:21] <RoyK> I'm not saying ubuntu server doesn't work - I still use it from time to time - but hell - I prefer debian - I don't think there's a death penalty for saying that even here ;)
[19:22] <sarnold> funny, I'd have thought it the other way around, since we've got a clear demarcation between main and universe
[19:22] <openfire> RoyK: You can prefer what you want. Your statement, however, was not one of preference. It was a judgment. "ubuntu really focuses a lot on the desktop, not on server/stability"
[19:23] <openfire> RoyK: I'm happy with people preferring what they want. But when people try to make statements of fact that are obviously BS, I call them out.
[19:23] <RoyK> openfire: we're all quite subjective, really
[19:25] <RoyK> openfire: but hell - if the "code of conduct" in here is to never complain about ubuntu, please show me that paragraph
[19:26] <openfire> RoyK: That's a total non-answer. And also very transparently a retreat and attempt to change the subject. You made an objective claim, and I called you out on it.
[19:26] <nacc> RoyK: no one said you violated the code of conduct. Stop being melodramatic.
[19:27] <nacc> RoyK: unless you can point to specific numbers of contributions that clearly show ubuntu changes are prioritizing desktop over server, maybe don't make such claims.
[19:28] <openfire> RoyK: If you make a claim, its on you to support your claim if someone calls you on it. You've failed to do so in any valid way. You've offered nothing in the way of data, your own unverifiable and suspect experience aside. You've offered opinions, and then relied on "it's just my preference" and other nonsense to change the context.
[19:29] <openfire> RoyK: Your original statement at issue was: "ubuntu really focuses a lot on the desktop, not on server/stability." Prove it, or be quiet.
[19:30] <teward> how about we all drop this argument and move on to something more beneficial
[19:30] <RoyK> this was about bug 1171945, which was never solved - that is - after upstart was thrown in the bin, it worked. As far as I can see, noone really worked on it while the problem persisted, which was some years
[19:30] <teward> rather than shooting back and forth at each other.
[19:30] <RoyK> teward: indeed
[19:30] <openfire> Agreed.
[19:31] <sarnold> hey I see me! :)
[19:41] <openfire> I see you, too!
[20:42] <Epx998> There an easy way to determine if a server is running beta or release on a non lts
[20:43] <Epx998> guess 'lsb_release -a' gives me what I need