Contributor fhucho

I find it very annoying when I update my Ubuntu box, only to find that after the update I need to reboot. I suggest a solution similar to Apple's software update*, where the update has the reboot icon located next to it to signify that a reboot will be needed or a reboot icon on the panel, similar to the way the new red down arrow in hardy signifies an important update.

*Image for reference: http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l25/CATSCEO/update.png

Show on Boot Splash screen "Ubuntu X64 edition" (or something like that) on 64 bit Ubuntu installations. (Kinda like XP 64 Bit boot screen) I think it would look cool and there isn't really a easy way to tell if its a 64 bit install. I think it would be a nice little touch for us 64 bit users, Thanks.

1. You have software in the repositories such as otrs that does not install properly. Why do you not get the existing software to work before wanting to make wholesale changes to your system. i.e. directory structure change and serial port changes.
2. Why does not ubuntu install the full program on the base system. Example: Vim has to be reinstalled to get the full version. That is a waste of my time for something that should already be there.
3. It really bothers me that gnome is becoming so dependent on mono and the like. I have this strange feeling that ms will come back and haunt linux users with njot only patent threats, but the vulnerabilities that are inherent in microsoft based code.
4. All the traditional tools we used to use in linux to tweak the system have disappeared. Ubuntu seems so crippled.
5. With so much advertising of dell on ubuntu sites, it almost seems like a conflict of interests. The way dell is laying off people and allegedly having financial problems will they put the choke on ubuntu? If dell is going to screw over the american workforce, they do not need our business. We have eight dell computers. We will not be buying another dell - linux or not.

1. There are deeply invasive performance/scalability/latency fixes for CFS regressions (vs. 2.6.24) in the 2.6.25 tree. These fixes are too invasive to be ported to the 2.6.24 kernel without significant risk.

2. Many of the driver updates/new drivers in the kernel-ubuntu package are merged into upstream as of 2.6.25. (This is always true, but the smaller the delta against upstream the better on release day).

3. Fedora 9 is based on 2.6.25 which means that key RH kernel developers are aggressively working to get the feature and performance/scalability regressions vs. 2.6.18 & 22 fixed.

4. The kgdb patch will probably be merged at the start of the 2.6.26 cycle which means the delta vs. 2.6.25 kernel should be pretty manageable. This would be really valuable from an LTS ongoing perspective.

5. The RT patch will be better maintained (and smaller) against 2.6.25. (see #3)

6. Better virtualization and SELinux support (see #3).

Given the life-cycle of an LTS release (especially this one which will finally have a meaningful chance to enter the data center) these considerations are especially important.

Obviously 2.6.25 would have to be in addition to 2.6.24 for the Hardy 8.04 LTS release time-frame, but it does allow the aforementioned benefits to be propagated forward.

The default Firefox ships with defaults that aren't exactly ideal for speed. If Ubuntu would default to slightly improved defaults (Pipelining enabled for example) it would speed it up and make it more ideal.