Although I still consider Lubuntu as being modestly OK (without snaps it would be almost perfect), perhaps some honesty, or sincerity is required on the lubuntu.me website.
The default download path directs to “22.04.4 LTS (Jammy Jellyfish)”, annotated as Recommended for most users.
Well, that is a bit strange, considering that “24.04 LTS (Noble Numbat)” is advertised as well (as being stable)!
So, ignorant new users, who try to do their best will end up with a propably almost depricate version 0.17 of LXQt (the heart of Lubuntu), instead of version 1.4.0!
Considering that LXQt version 2.0.0 is already out there. So even the 22.04 version of Lubuntu (featuring LXQt 1.4.0) is old-skool already.
i am not even talking about kernel version, or versions of other relevant software.
Post scriptum
LXQt is great software. Many changes occur with every update, certainly from 0.14 to 1.0, and 2.0, mostly under the hood. That is what great software is about…predictability in behaviour. Version 2.0 offers (amongst other changes) the so called fancy menu. That is a variant of adding programs to the quick-launch section on the panel. I, and you, using default Lubuntu, can live without it
Yeah, I knew, and did not mention it, since it is not what I am talking about here. If you offer two LTS versions in the download section, it is strange that the older one (even be it LTS) is described as ‘Recommended…’, and the most recent LTS as ‘Stable’. Confusing. That was my point.
I have at least two more things to say about the “Recommended for most users”-advised-download of Lubuntu 22.04 (as recommended on the Lubuntu.me download section):
it is propably a Ubuntu-inheritance, but the 22.04 distro is running with Linux kernel version 6.5.0-18-generic (after a new install), which got updated after running apt update today to version 6.5.0-35-generic (build date May 7th, which is old already). I hope, that both kernels are provided by the Ubuntu team (“…responsible for patching the kernel with latest security changes”). Let’s assume those people know what they are doing.
I understand that LTS distributions will always leg behind with the kernel version. However, kernel version 6.5 is not in the long term scheme (see https:://kernel.org for details). I sure hope the person or persons (at Ubuntu most likely) responsible for patching 6.5 with security updates know what they are doing, and do so in a timely manner.
So, to conclude point 1): it is very strange that Lubuntu 22.04 LTS is still “Recommended for most users” in the download section of Lubuntu.me. I would really not use this Lubuntu 22.04 LTS for any serious stuff. Well…that is my recommendation
The second point seems to be less important after I elaborated on the first point. Maybe later.
Please, change the “Recommended for most users” recommendation!! In my humble opinion, Lubuntu 22.04 LTS should not be used, or beter even avoided at all costs for new installations.
UPDATE
Before I forget it… The second point:
brave prospective new users of Lubuntu 22.04 LTS, daring to experiment, will not be able to install this version in KVM, unless they know already about fixing DNS resolver problems.
I tried to install the said recommended distribution in KVM, and for some reason domain name resolution will not work after starting the ISO. The internet is there, and /etc/resolv.conf points to the resolver provided by systemd-resolved, but it does not work.
The kernels are all Ubuntu packages, and not related to Lubuntu. Being a flavor we have defaults that differ to Ubuntu Desktop, or Ubuntu Server (for releases of 20.04 in regards Ubuntu Desktop; we’re still identical to 18.04 Desktop & earlier), but that’s for new installs.
The 6.5 kernel was from Ubuntu 23.10, which is getting rather close to the EOL warning notices coming out (~six weeks before), thus as all prior LTS releases, the HWE kernel moves to the next release being 24.04 LTS.
I’ll refer you to Kernel/LTSEnablementStack - Ubuntu Wiki for more details, but a quick check, and you can see the next replacement already visible for 22.04 if you look
That has been visible for a few days already; ie. the 24.04 LTS kernel that will be included on Ubuntu 22.04.5 LTS Desktop (including Lubuntu 22.04.5) ISOs. Installed systems upgrade to that before 22.04.5 ISO release though. There has been no change here (that I recall at least) for over a decade. It’s available first as the edge kernel for initial testing… before moving closer to actually being default for users.
Kernel 6.8 is EOL, and does not receive security updates (from the Linux kernel team). So, perhaps was 6.6 not a bad choice? It will continue to receive updates (from the Linux kernel team) until end of 2026
I wouldn’t worry about that, we’re not get security fixes directly from the upstream Linux kernel team, at least not directly if using Ubuntu packages. Our security fixes & updates come from the Ubuntu Kernel team, and its that team who decide what kernel they want to support for the twelve years for a LTS (five years standard support; five additional years of ESM/Pro, plus additional two years of legacy support). The Ubuntu term will backport security fixes from newer kernels to the supported kernel(s) of Ubuntu.
I have removed that wording. This was a leftover recommendation from before 24.04 was released and was missed when the page was edited. Either LTS version is fine to use. The recommendation was intended to guide folks to the supported LTS release.
In that case, I’d just continue a bit here. As a reaction on what humpty responded earlier in this thread.
Yeah, the minimal install probably does not have snaps (I did not check that), but…as I recall, when trying to install Firefox using apt, it will snap-in Firefox (as a snap package).
About my earlier remarks about the 6.8 EOL kernel included in 22.04 LTS right now. Not so long ago I’ve read an interesting and fair enough objective whitepaper about the state of backporting security patches in older kernel versions by RHEL, and also a review of that paper on LWN.net.
I can’t find the review at this moment, but it made me wonder, or even paranoid perhaps, about how the situation could be at Debian, Ubuntu or Arch Linux (to name a few big-ones). I don’t even want to think about how the situation could be with smaller distributions (smaller as in: not so many hands or knowledge around), cheerfully adapting and building their own kernel version (e.g. SparkyLinux). As I understand it, SparkyLinux comes by default with a kernel provided by Debian, and that should be a safe default.
I think I have that as aligned as we can make it. The 2 columns are different heights so they seem to be centered the best I can with the tools I am working with. Please give it a look.
There is an empty line below the headline for 22.04 in the right column. Without it both columns will probably have the same height. It should look like
Furthermore, the symbol for the manual together with the short text line beneath - maybe the whole text of this page? - could be centered.
Ok, I think I have that as close as it can be. If you read the text there are 2 extra lines for the backports section so those two columns can’t come out to the same size. I centered the Manual stuff. Anything else I missed?
ouchhh, thats my point about DNS stuff while using wireguard on lubuntu version 24.04, for somehow i got the anomaly. It’s sounds strange when you experienced that on version 22.04 but i got it while using version 24.04.
Yeah, after writing my complaint (sorry for that), I’d realized it is most likely something on the host. Although, as far as I recall, deploying the same ISO on VirtualBox did not have this problem.
I recently changed from VirtualBox to KVM.
Although I 1) like the interface of VirtualBox a lot more compared to virt-manager, and 2) the IP address acquired by DHCP is on the LAN and not on a private sub-lan (as I call it), it turns out that KVM is performing much and much better.
I guess KVM is limited to Linux, so those brave prospective new users coming from the Windows realm will not suffer from this much.
