Master broke for one day. I think it is very premature to switch distros on one issue.
3 Likes
So there shouldn’t be an issue for the next stable release of darktable on Debian / Ubuntu based distros?
From darktable GitHub
The master branch comes with no guarantee of stability and might corrupt your database and XMP files, result in loss of data and edit history or temporarily break compatibility with previous versions and commits.
How dangerous is it? Most of the time, it is fairly stable. As with any rolling-release kind of deployment, bugs appear more often but are fixed faster too. Sometimes, though, these bugs can result in losses or inconsistencies in the editing history of your pictures. This is fine if you don’t need to open your edits again in the future, but maybe not if you manage an estate.
and for what is it worth … the fix for the master build is a one line change to debian/darktable.install
3 Likes
I have been using (OBS build) master branch of darktable for almost two years now for my daily work and have very rarely experienced problems both from the master branch itself and from OBS as the builder. And when there were problems, they were not so severe that they prevented the daily use of darktable.
I must say that for me it is amazing how much commitment is invested in stability and smooth functioning already in the developer version.
1 Like
Sorry, I don’t have any packaging experience. That’s why I use the OBS repos.
Aren’t most linux users using debian or a debian variation distro? With Ubuntu, MX, Mint, antix, Tails, Neptune and many others.
Maybe, but the two people who maintain the OBS builds use suse or fedora.
Yes. Actually I currently run 4.0.0 on Mint. I don’t understand the crazy panic over this at all.
There is no panic from me (I’m the OP).
I was just asking a simple question: on OBS dt shows v4.0.1 and I was wondering what was the changes between 4.0.0 and 4.0.1.
Then Brian_Innes chimed in that since master (not current) broke for the debian & ubuntu, the dt team should drop all debian & ubuntu development.
That is not what was said.
I just re-read entry #3, that’s still what I understand.
I think it means users move away, not the project.
It was also a one line fix to the deb package. No need for such theatrics.
Things break all the time in software.
2 Likes
exactly
That is not what I said, nor what I wrote.
True. You wrote:
Then again, you also started a thread about your distro hopping..
Most mainline distros are more or less on a par for users (once you are used to them), and the small ones are often specialised (regionally, or aimed at professional groups, or…). Each distro will have its quirks though, and getting used to those means you get more efficient with them. Changing distro every time a minor problem comes along (like this: a small error in the way a package was build) costs hours to re-install the new distro, and then finding the programs you want to use in their latest version. You lalso ose the benefits of knowing the particularities of the distro. And you’ll run out of distro’s sooner or later…
So moving away from whatever distro had a small, temporary, glitch is “not optimal”.
5 Likes
4.0.1 filtered through to me on Mint today. No troubles no dramas, even before with 4.0.0
1 Like
Which brings us back to my original question:
Do you know what are the changes between 4.0.0 and 4.0.1?
Is this just a few bug fixes, any new feature?
Just bug fixes
Thank you. That’s all I was asking about. I didn’t mean to start a metaphysical introspective thread.