delonia

That person from OVH is a character.

You can install an "Ubuntu" on OVH, but the kernel is a modified kernel. When you try to install standard services that are meant to work with Ubuntu, they do not work with the "OVH Ubuntu".

Apparently, Ubuntu contacted OVH to make the Ubuntu kernel closer to the stock Ubuntu kernel but OVH did not bother to do anything about it.

Then, Ubuntu told them that they break the trademark and one of the things they can do is get a license for the existing messy "OHV handicapped ubuntu", so that they keep providing this mess.

At that point, the founder of OVH went on twitter and a shitstorm ensued.

The whole affair reflects badly on the OVH founder. But many people will keep another impression in their mind.

ZFS is under the CDDL while Java is not under the CDDL.

CDDL is an open-source licence just as the GPL.

Ubuntu 16.04 comes with ZFS preinstalled and ready to use.

Well, you need to install the user package 'zfsutils-linux' and you are ready to go.

The kernel modules for ZFS are already in the default kernel and are loaded automatically when you create a volume.

Ubuntu has "Ubuntu server" which is Ubuntu without X, GNOME and other desktop services.

In addition, there is Ubuntu Minimal (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/MinimalCD) which is the most minimal you can get in Ubuntu.

The GPL says that the software is "as is", no warranty of any kind. Similarly, I could scream to have the developers to perform some testing and provide a bit of warranty.

With Ubuntu and any other software, you get the source and it is up to you to deal with the replacement of any trademark strings. What packages are included in Ubuntu, changes all the time and the code changes as well. How can a policy document be explicit when there is no infrastructure yet in place to deal with those code changes? CentOS was in this same position and they did the work without bitching to Redhat.

Garrett is proposing another wild goose chase, just because he dislikes Ubuntu so much.

Even the GPL licence has a "no warranty clause". The software is "as is", it is your problem to keep the pieces when it breaks. You can imagine a person spinning this into "you cannot trust open-source because they do not offer just a bit of warranty".

"If you are smart enough, you can spin anything towards the direction of your choosing."

We see this all the time in online communities and we see it again with all this "hatred" against the Ubuntu community.

Here is Mark Shuttleworth replying to Garret: http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/38467.html?thread=1474883#cmt147...

So Garret contacted Ubuntu for some unspecified project that he claimed he wanted to start. In reality, he was mining for quotes to misinterpret. Sad git.

That's repeated all too often and it gets stuck into the mind of people. But is it actually true?

Ubuntu is still heavily based on Debian and still reuses most of the packages. There has been a gradual move towards systemd and systemd is default in Ubuntu 15.10.

To me, mjg59 comes out as a bitter person. He used to work for Canonical in the early days of Ubuntu. He shared the vision for a usable open-source desktop.

Then came the new GNOME 3 and the particular way that GNOME development works. It was not workable to offer to the users a stable and distinct user experience. So, Unity was created and all hell broke loose.

Now, when Mark farts, they scream "Terrorist gas attack!". A couple of days ago there was some open-source appreciation day by the Ubuntu community and it looks very suspicious that mjg95 coincided his rant with this. I think the previous rant was also coinciding with some similar positive Ubuntu announcement.

It looks even more difficult to get an open-source desktop. mjg59's attitude is like "if it is not ours, let's f* their efforts anyway".

The author of that article says "I know from personal experience that today [2005] Microsoft takes application compatibility very seriously".

And if you want to install Windows on a computer that already has a Linux distribution installed (dual-boot), then Windows will replace the existing boot manager, making it really difficult to boot Linux. That thing used to happen then, and it still happens now (2015).

For a not-too-heavy user, the phone is fine as it is now. The system updates in April fixed the battery issues.

Cannot imagine what you have been doing to the phone to crash five times.

There is a third bq phone with Ubuntu expected in 2015. That phone will be the convergence phone.

The Meizu MX4 is expected to be released to Europe pretty soon. It has 4G. Obviously, it will be significantly more expensive than the E5.

The author of Mer is unhappy with Ubuntu and this looks more like an attack than a constructive post.

MediaTek is now contributing directly to the Linux kernel. Those header files are from 2010. It's just an issue of updating them.