On Wednesday, 1 October 2014 at 17:07:53 UTC, eles wrote:
> For how long will the repository taken down? 24 hours? 3 days?

As long as nobody works on it, i.e. forever.

> You speak about Red Hat or Debian or Ubuntu repositories? And? You cannot live without the super-updates for 3 days?
>
> The problem that you expose is negligible.

I don't update software without a reason. Only when something bugs me.

> Most of them, have. And for the release-style distributions, upgrade is rather straightforward

A have linux mint 12 installation with mint4win (wubi), on linux mint forums I was told, that updating from the latest repository won't work. I would be grateful, if you explain, how to upgrade it to the latest version. Yeah, theoretically it should be able to just overwrite files on disk without paying much attention to disk nature.

On 10/1/2014 10:44 AM, Dicebot via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> On Wednesday, 1 October 2014 at 16:57:07 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 1 October 2014 at 15:45:26 UTC, eles wrote:
>>> The first thing that I love in Linux is the centralized update.
>>
>> The downside is it's taken down centrally too, while distributed
>> windows software continues to work independently of each other.
>>
>> On Wednesday, 1 October 2014 at 15:48:58 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
>>> This claim is so strange I can't even understand what it is about.
>>> Which repositories get abandoned?
>>
>> Repositories of the not latest version of the OS. Because only latest
>> version receives development. That is, if the OS doesn't have rolling
>> updates.
>
> This is simply telling lies, sorry. All distros that don't have rolling
> release model provide LTS versions that get all important updates
> (including security updates, of course) for years. For example Ubuntu
> LTS lasts for 4 years where one can count on fast updates.
>
> And even after that period your distro does not disappear magically, you
> are simply force to install necessary updates manually (as opposed to 1
> click / command update from repo), basically getting you back to Windows
> _default_ state of things.

And even if all of _that_ fails, the source is available for manual building.

On 10/1/2014 6:41 AM, JN via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> On Wednesday, 1 October 2014 at 05:09:45 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>
>> Other OSes/distros are likely equally easy. Please, reply with
>> examples to help ensure other people on the same OS/distro as you have
>> no excuse not to update!
>
> I find it ironic that it's another "big global" security hole about
> which Windows users don't even have to be concerned about.

False.

All of my windows boxes needed to be updated.  One of the first things I do on any new windows box is install cygwin to get a saner development environment with bash as my shell.

I wouldn't be shocked at all if other windows apps bundle bash for one reason or another too.  It might not come as part of the base install (though given the huge pile of stuff that gets installed, I wouldn't put huge bets on it not lurking off in a dark corner somewhere), but that's not the end of the story.

On Wednesday, 1 October 2014 at 18:42:41 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
> A have linux mint 12 installation with mint4win (wubi), on linux mint forums I was told, that updating from the latest repository won't work. I would be grateful, if you explain, how to upgrade it to the latest version. Yeah, theoretically it should be able to just overwrite files on disk without paying much attention to disk nature.

Linux Mint 12 is not LTS release (and _insanely_ old). You are supposed to do regular full upgrades with non-LTS releases, this is why bash update was not propagated to its repositories.

However you can simply go to http://packages.linuxmint.com/search.php?keyword=bash&release=any&section=any and download .deb package of more recent release from there to install manually. It may work or may not depending on how compatible dependencies are.

This a very unpleasant experience you get compared to sticking to LTS or up to date distro but pretty much on the same level as one you normally have in the Windows all the time. And with little time investments it is miles and miles ahead any possible Windows experience you can get even theoretically (speaking exclusively about upgrade/update process here).

On 10/01/2014 03:19 PM, Brad Roberts via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> On 10/1/2014 6:41 AM, JN via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 1 October 2014 at 05:09:45 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>>
>>> Other OSes/distros are likely equally easy. Please, reply with
>>> examples to help ensure other people on the same OS/distro as you have
>>> no excuse not to update!
>>
>> I find it ironic that it's another "big global" security hole about
>> which Windows users don't even have to be concerned about.
>
> False.
>
> All of my windows boxes needed to be updated.  One of the first things I
> do on any new windows box is install cygwin to get a saner development
> environment with bash as my shell.
>

Yea. I've been very tempted to put bash on my Win desktops as well. Heck, I may even have some old installation of msys/mingw bash still lying around somewhere.

> I wouldn't be shocked at all if other windows apps bundle bash for one
> reason or another too.  It might not come as part of the base install
> (though given the huge pile of stuff that gets installed, I wouldn't put
> huge bets on it not lurking off in a dark corner somewhere), but that's
> not the end of the story.

Yup, Git comes to mind. (Or at least Git GUI?) Don't know whether that actually exposes any attack vectors, but I guess that's kinda the big question everyone's trying to find out, isn't it? "What are all the possible attack vectors of this flaw?" Some of them have been discovered, but who knows what else there may be.

On 10/01/2014 02:42 PM, Kagamin wrote:
>
> A have linux mint 12 installation with mint4win (wubi), on linux mint
> forums I was told, that updating from the latest repository won't work.


I sympathize: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-software-2/how-to-install-enlightenment-on-mint-15-a-4175492936/

That annoyance is why (aside from servers) I've switched to rolling-release distros. In my case, Debian Testing (which, as I've been told by others here, and can personally confirm, is much more stable than it's unfortunately-chosen name would suggest). I picked that one since I'm most familiar with the general Debian family of distros (apt-get and all). But I've heard good things about Arch too and may look into it.

FWIW, I don't think all release-based distros are quite as aggressive as Mint with abandoning older releases. Even the super-outdated Debian 6 apparently still has some support via its LTS repos. I suspect Mint may need to do things that way just as a manpower issue. Mint's a popular distro, but I get the impression it's development is a relatively small grassroots thing with much more limited resources than say Debian or Ubuntu. (Of course, I could be wrong.)

On 10/01/2014 01:38 PM, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
>
> One nice thing about Ubuntu is that they even give you access to
> future kernel versions through what they call HWE.  In short, I can
> run a 14.04 LTS kernel on a 12.04 server, so that I'm able to use
> modern hardware and take advantage of software that uses features of
> Linux that are actively worked on (like LXC) on an older software
> stack.
>

Is there anything similar in Debian?

On Wednesday, 1 October 2014 at 20:45:14 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> I suspect Mint may need to do things that way just as a manpower issue. Mint's a popular distro, but I get the impression it's development is a relatively small grassroots thing with much more limited resources than say Debian or Ubuntu. (Of course, I could be wrong.)

This matches my observations too. It gained lot of popularity when Ubuntu switched to Unity as default desktop environment and Fedora moved with Gnome 3 - quite many users started looking for a distro with more conservative defaults. However its development / maintenance team does not seem to match that popularity burst.

On Wednesday, 1 October 2014 at 20:03:11 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> This a very unpleasant experience you get compared to sticking to LTS or up to date distro

Erm, upgrading to the latest version is exactly what I want, old version is of no interest to me. I read, one can reorient aptitude to latest repository and update everything, but I was told it won't work. So the question is how to update kernel and everything else?

On 2 October 2014 08:00, Kagamin via Digitalmars-d-announce <digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, 1 October 2014 at 20:03:11 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
>>
>> This a very unpleasant experience you get compared to sticking to LTS or up to date distro
>
>
> Erm, upgrading to the latest version is exactly what I want, old version is of no interest to me. I read, one can reorient aptitude to latest repository and update everything, but I was told it won't work.

Doesn't Linux Mint provide an upgrade facility for you?  Looks to me that you have gone with the wrong distro of choice. ;)

Upgrading by using apt is doable, but from what you've demonstrated about your knowledge, I wouldn't recommend it to you.

> So the question is how to update kernel and everything else?

http://community.linuxmint.com/tutorial/view/2

If your /home is on a separate partition, just download the latest LTS iso and do a fresh install.  Only thing to note is that when it comes to partitioning, you must absolutely not destroy your /home unless you want your personal files gone.  :)

Iain.