Hacker News Reader

Comment by metadat | Hacker News Reader

> You may upgrade your Jellyfin instances at any time now, however please read on for a complete detailing of what's new and changed, including some very important release notes..

> Ubuntu users: We have dropped support for non-LTS Ubuntu releases with 10.9.0. That is, we have not built 10.9.0 packages for any releases except 20.04 LTS, 22.04 LTS, and 24.04 LTS, and we will not publish builds for any new non-LTS releases going forward.

You know that stupidly nice Ubuntu 18.04 LTS box you painstakingly setup just four years ago right before the pandemic that you can't trust to auto-upgrade? Go fuck yourself.

I'm done with Shibuntu, now Debian only with no regrets or downsides so far.

Downvotes welcome, but p.s. I love you <3.

Wasn't docker supposed to make OS release irrelevant?

Sigh, I love you all.

View on HN

> Wasn't docker supposed to make OS release irrelevant?

As someone who is running Jellyfin 10.9.0 on Ubuntu 18.04 via docker, yes, it really has.

The non-support only matters for directly installing the Debian packages. Docker continues to work just fine.

Sweet, thank goodness - Thank you @upon_drumhead!!!

Ubuntu 18.04 LTS went EOL in May 2023 for anyone not paying Canonical for ESM, so their choice to not build for it seems entirely reasonable.

I'm super confused: doesn't Debian also have a 5 year support cycle? How is Debian better than Ubuntu on this particular issue?

I've been upgrading the same Ubuntu server across LTS releases since 14.04 - now on 22.04 - without any major issues. Spending 30 minutes every two years to upgrade major versions isn't that big of a lift.

The Debian upgrade process actually works.

I'm guessing I've done 6 in-place upgrades over the last decade and have yet to have one fail.

It sounds like maybe you've had issues but the process does typically work.

"Maybe" is a major understatement on the Ubuntu upgrade fail front, friend.

> nice Ubuntu 18.04 box you painstakingly setup just four years ago

It's 2024; 18.04 was over 6 years ago.

This is false, 2018.06 was 4 years and 11 months ago. Just saying, not true. And it's been totally abandoned for some time now, at least two years by my estimate.

How often do you rebuild your bare metal garage snowflakes?

Every 12 months or so because it’s mostly automated with netboot.xyz and Ansible.

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

18.06 was 5 years 11 months 11 days. A: it makes no sense to count from when you personally installed it vs when it was released. B: it was in any case so close to 6 we may as well say it was 6 years C: if you don't mind running 6 year old software just run old jellyfin too.

> I'm done with [Ubuntu], now Debian only with no regrets or downsides so far.

There's no OS in the world which has both of "requires no maintenance" and "receives all upgrades forever".

But 4 years is a pretty short time. Compare 4 years with the 20+ evil Microsoft Windows gives to pirates for free.. when $ms doesn't really have to.. dozens of years of compatibility. Linux sucks in this dimension, and I am a huge advocate professionally and personally of Linux.

Have you ever tried to install the latest Node.js and discovered your glibc.so is too old? It's a major impediment and just plain sucks, especially for open source.

18.04 is from 2018. That's what the "18" means. That's 6 years.

Apt-get dist upgrade is really not hard. Learn it, do it.

Society & world has a necessity to not anchor itself to a distant past. In general I believe free software is moving at a bit more incremental pace, with some noticeable new innovation sprinkled in. But a 4.15 kernel from 2018 really is from a before time, before things started settling down. I have no respect for preserving those systems. Anchoring ourselves to the past is antithetical to open source's strengths.

It's hosed several of my machines before, please forgive me Father, but never again.

remember: desktop users want the latest software, now. server users want nothing to change, ever.

Arch is quite close to that.

I moved from Debian to Arch for my main home server because I was fed up with reinstalling between versions. Now I think you can upgrade in place.

I will be back to Debian at some point because Arch requires me to remember to update. It works great but since I have everything on docker it depends not make much sense to be bleeding edge

> reinstalling between versions

When did Debian require a reinstall between versions? I've been upgrading in place since around 1996. In those early years, sometimes upgrades had rough spots but that hasn't been the case for at least a couple decades.

Nice track record! You may have used my tiny contribution to the kernel from ca. 1995 if you used a specific (but common) NIC at the time :)

I came back to Debian when it was 7 or 8 and installed it 6 months before the next release.

The upgrade notes made it very clear that in place upgrades are an abomination and that I will burn in hell if I do that. Or something like that.

So I reinstalled.

And took a Leo of faith in the next version by using "stable" as the distribution, apt dist-upgrade and all. It worked !

Maybe the alarming messages are now gone, good thing. I will be switching from arch to debian soon and stay there for ever.

18.04 went out of service for non-pro, non-legacy users over a year ago. You've had a year to upgrade the machine, now is the time to move up to the best LTS you can run. This is 100% on you.

Why not upgrade Ubuntu instead? Surely you can get the benefits of new security latches and other software updated as well? Indirectly then uou get this version of Jellyfin?

The problem I find is that whatever comes after 24.04 and before 26.04 will not be supported by Jellyfin.

LTS releases will only upgrade to other LTS releases unless you configure it differently. Just avoid non-LTS releases.

I like arch linux. It seems to be a good balance between up-to-date and stable.

You have to be conscious when you set it up, and I diligently keep notes of what I did.

I use Arch on my desktop and it's definitely more up-to-date than stable. The Plasma 6 upgrade rendered one install a black screen and I've had to rescue installs because I wasn't on top of Arch News.

I do enjoy my Arch desktop but it's a labor of love.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com