Ubuntu Developers Want To Make It Easier To Run The Latest NVIDIA Drivers

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Ubuntu Developers Want To Make It Easier To Run The Latest NVIDIA Drivers

Jorge Castro of Canonical has started coordinating some work around providing newer upstream NVIDIA proprietary graphics drivers for users, primarily Ubuntu gamers...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Ubuntu-Better-Gaming-Drivers

[blackout23]

Never understood the irrational fear of new upstream releases. It's like they think upstream developers don't do any Q&A. Even NVIDIA Beta drivers are probably more stable than most things Canonical puts out.

[mezo]

i hope debian goes the same way. browser and video driver should be alway up2date.

[ElectricPrism]

And here we see why Arch has gained so much traction. Arch Packages come straight from the Software's Creators - Fresh.

Ubuntu inherits packages from Debian and has decided to complexify the situation by creating .click and .snap packages in addition to .deb

What's worse is that some distributions are based on Ubuntu meaning their software has to go through 3 gates before it gets to the user - so a user in 2015 could be running a LibreOffice from 2011 - (whose brilliant idea was that.)

Every time someone uses a PPA it's the users breaking away from Ubuntu's philosiphy that software should be "stable" - more like "stale". Packages sit and rot in Ubuntu's repository and users add PPA's to solve that oversight which creates package conflicts and destabalizes the system until it becomes a big unstable piece of sh`t.

Try running Ubuntu 14.04 and upgrading to 14.10 and then 15.04 and so on. Real Linux Users don't want to reinstall their OS every 6 months, Noobs may quit linux in less than 6 months but the Real Community probably upgrades once a year or less which is why Rolling Release favors true Linux supporters.

I understand Ubuntu likes to "bask in the limelight" by bloggers and news sites reviewing their stuff every 6 months - but that's at the expense of the product being quality - the number of Ubuntu Version Fragments is too d`mn high.

PACMAN + AUR on the other hand compared against APT + PPA provides software all from a centralized single Umbrella, the aged Software I had to endure on Elementary OS Freya was rediculous - packages from pre 2012 in 2015.

Ubuntu and Canonical have seemed to have pissed off the community so much now though that it seems like their house of cards is crashing down with every next move. The creation of Mint was evidence of this "dissatisfaction" and simple things like Mir seem to reinforce the community's chant "Abandon Ship".

[samigina]

PACMAN + AUR on the other hand compared against APT + PPA provides software all from a centralized single Umbrella, the aged Software I had to endure on Elementary OS Freya was rediculous - packages from pre 2012 in 2015.
.

AUR is not really comparable to PPA, one offers compiled packages while the other offers mainly source code (which depending in the software, can take really long times for compilation), for the Ubuntu user niche compiling is not something desirable.

[Tabris]

i hope debian goes the same way. browser and video driver should be alway up2date.

You can already add the sources for experimental and install individual packages like Iceweasel, Chromium or the Nvidia drivers, and normally you'll get the newly released versions within days or hours. Even if you are running Stable they'll hardly pull any dependencies.

[andre30correia]

And here we see why Arch has gained so much traction. Arch Packages come straight from the Software's Creators - Fresh.

Ubuntu inherits packages from Debian and has decided to complexify the situation by creating .click and .snap packages in addition to .deb

What's worse is that some distributions are based on Ubuntu meaning their software has to go through 3 gates before it gets to the user - so a user in 2015 could be running a LibreOffice from 2011 - (whose brilliant idea was that.)

Every time someone uses a PPA it's the users breaking away from Ubuntu's philosiphy that software should be "stable" - more like "stale". Packages sit and rot in Ubuntu's repository and users add PPA's to solve that oversight which creates package conflicts and destabalizes the system until it becomes a big unstable piece of sh`t.

Try running Ubuntu 14.04 and upgrading to 14.10 and then 15.04 and so on. Real Linux Users don't want to reinstall their OS every 6 months, Noobs may quit linux in less than 6 months but the Real Community probably upgrades once a year or less which is why Rolling Release favors true Linux supporters.

I understand Ubuntu likes to "bask in the limelight" by bloggers and news sites reviewing their stuff every 6 months - but that's at the expense of the product being quality - the number of Ubuntu Version Fragments is too d`mn high.

PACMAN + AUR on the other hand compared against APT + PPA provides software all from a centralized single Umbrella, the aged Software I had to endure on Elementary OS Freya was rediculous - packages from pre 2012 in 2015.

Ubuntu and Canonical have seemed to have pissed off the community so much now though that it seems like their house of cards is crashing down with every next move. The creation of Mint was evidence of this "dissatisfaction" and simple things like Mir seem to reinforce the community's chant "Abandon Ship".

you miss somothing. not every thing works from aur, wait another you need to extract and compile the things from aur, ah another every week we need to correct things in arch, when something new like gnome, cinnamon or kde come back we need to configure the themes e all type of things, arch is not a stable system i have experience with arch, some are good some are really bad.
another point elementary os is based in ubuntu 12.04 but is not ubuntu.
with ubuntu 14.04 with some bunch of ppa and last kernel/mesa you have a fresh system and stable.
another point fedora and opensuse use the same system, mac osx have versions too windows hava version red hat have versions

[milkylainen]

I don't get it. NVIDIA binary drivers are a breeze to install. Just execute the installer?

[johnc]

Back in the 10.10 - 11.04 days they had the x-swat PPA that worked perfectly fine.

Since it was working so well Canonical decided to get rid of it.

[nightmarex]

you miss somothing. not every thing works from aur, wait another you need to extract and compile the things from aur, ah another every week we need to correct things in arch, when something new like gnome, cinnamon or kde come back we need to configure the themes e all type of things, arch is not a stable system i have experience with arch, some are good some are really bad.
another point elementary os is based in ubuntu 12.04 but is not ubuntu.
with ubuntu 14.04 with some bunch of ppa and last kernel/mesa you have a fresh system and stable.
another point fedora and opensuse use the same system, mac osx have versions too windows hava version red hat have versions

Okay I don't know what experience you have with Arch but I would say it is limited...

Some misconceptions, Arch (regular) isn't the "freshest" packages there is Arch testing as a buffer so Arch itself is usually a few weeks behind testing on many packages except with security packages.

Arch AUR isn't always compile from source sometimes it just downloads binaries, a good example is the catalyst driver, you do however have to make the packages but a quick download and extract, makepkg -si, and you're all set it's easier than any apt-get nonsense (I have many mint and arch systems up at the moment).

Upgrading from one release to another with mint/ubuntu is a nightmare. It's easy enough to start the process (pointing to the new release repos) but it's a long and tedious once that requires many interactions with the console during that time where as in arch, pacman -Syu and you're always all set... Again very very much easier...

Now this stable bull. There are instances where a program may require a different library a driver may not be 100% (radeonsi circa a little over a year ago) This has nothing to do with Arch and it's stablity. It itself is a rock solid platform and requires little to keep it up to date. Cinnamon has had a couple of hiccups that were sorted out within a day so others downstream could enjoy it without worry, and the thanks Arch gets is being called unstable?