On Sat, Jun 29, 2024 at 1:37 AM Steve Litt <slitt@???>
wrote:

> Simon Walter said on Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:47:00 +0200
>
> >On 2024-06-28 04:18, o1bigtenor via Dng wrote:
> >> LXD was enough - - - - the joys I experienced there - - - well - - -
> >> the old
> >> saying is once burnt and twice shy!
> >
> >Ah... So it's a fork of LXD. OK. I proceed with more caution then.
>
> Is there something wrong with LXD?
>
> Well - - - it was promoted as a feature but you were (software) updated
whenever
the system chose to. So if there was a buggy update - - - you didn't have a
choice
you lived with it until it was rolled back. If you tried to circumvent the
constant
updating (newest is always best you know) then your system would crash (at
least mine did (actual system shutdown)). Then trying to remove snapd or
snappy
or whatever its nomen is was impossible to remove. even using rm -r didn't
remove
things. I finally managed to remove it by reinstalling (you know the M$ way
of resolving
issues).

Seemed to me that the idea was to force one into a close and intimate
relationship
with Canonical - - - canonical seemed to think that this would then enhance
its
share price which would then make some individuals a LOT of moolah. Note -
- -
this is my analysis(!!!!). Some of the devs seemed to listen but most were
like
to have been programmed in - - - my way or the highway.

It would have been a great system without that particular group of features
but
I really don't have the time to dig into something that burned me badly
once - - -
there was a lot of time spent trying to get things to where I wanted them.
So
- - - now its a warning that the antecedents are/were 'not friendly'.

HTH