Slashdot Mirror
Debian 2.2r5 Released
Debian potato has been updated to 2.2r5. See the press release for info on what has changed - mostly bugfixes, of course, since this is the stable distribution.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
A comprehensive list of which packages were included and which were rejected is at http://people.debian.org/~joey/2.2r5/full.html
It's a release for security updates. This is very different from a bugfix release, which would generally be a much greater undertaking and require a lot more packages to be upgraded to newer versions. Think of it this way: a security update would be when Slash code allows users to gain the access levels of other users, including elevated privileges. A bugfix release would be an increment in the Slash code that fixes broken features that do not include security compromises. Makes sense? =)
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
I run Debian "unstable" on 3 out of the 5 boxes that I admin (personal use, not corporate). For the most part I prefer unstable because of the newer software that it allows access to. Some software isn't available in .deb form in the stable distribution ("gallery", for example, an online photo gallery system). Other software varies a lot between the stable and unstable distributions ("unstable" software being more advanced, usually). For the most part "unstable" is a misnomer.
But... there are those times when something breaks. This is the reason you shouldn't use unstable on a production box. Earlier this week I worked out a KSpread spreadsheet that I needed for a meeting with an advisor. The day for my meeting came and KSpread wouldn't open up because of a conflict with the libpng version. To the best of my knowledge this hasn't been fixed yet. Others report similar problems. Needless to say I wasn't pleased, and I had to go to my meeting without the spreadsheet.
Does that mean I'll stop using "unstable"? Nah. Should everybody use it? No way.
-- "Complacency is a far more dangerous attitude than outrage." -Naomi Littlebear
why not just upgrade to Woody? even though it's classified unstable.. i've been running it and having no problems at all with it... there was a certain way to upgrade from 2.2 to 3 (i unfortunately forgot), but if you sign on to irc.openprojects.net, join #debian and message Apt.. it should give you a few simple steps on how to upgrade to Woody...
"The ones who dont do anything are always the ones who try to pull you down" -- Henry Rollins
Or did they rig their package so protocol verion 1 doesn't allow your box to hacked?
Or are they just ignoring the huge exploit problems with the ssh1 protocol?
Novel theory: Modern Man evolved from psychopath
You know, you can install 2.4 on any debian box. Sure, it's not as easy as installing an rpm, but I'd rather install a new kernel by hand than try to fix RPM Hell.
For those of you who would want to use debian unstable, update your /etc/apt/sources.list to be like this, debian unstable is not really unstable after all, its just that the list might be broken some times:
# See sources.list(5) for more information, especialy
# Remember that you can only use http, ftp or file URIs
# CDROMs are managed through the apt-cdrom tool.
deb ftp://ftp.us.debian.org/debian unstable main contrib non-free
deb ftp://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US unstable/non-US main contrib non-free
Here is an example. I am not a KDE advocate or anything (Window Maker for me) but I noticed that all versions of KDE is still listed as "testing" or "unstable" while GNOME 1.0.55 is listed in the "Stable" package section? I'm sorry, but KDE 2.2.x is ALOT more stable that "October" GNOME which was released in 1999! Debian needs to get with it. Stability is one thing, but this is bordering on the rediculous. October GNOME was not all that stable, and KDE 2.2.2 is one of the most stable desktops out there.
-- 4 8 15 16 23 42
you don't need to install the 2.4 kernel from source on a Debian system (stable). Use the 2.4 packages built for stable maintained by Adrian Bunk.
/etc/apt/sources.list
Add the following line to your
deb http://people.debian.org/~bunk/debian potato main
run dselect and update your package list, then make sure you select one of the 2.4 kernels, it will upgrade several base packages to support the new kernel, but it works absolutely perfect!
I used to run debian stable, but switched to testing several months ago. I think testing is the dist for most users. Too bad newbies get steered toward stable. The testing dist is stable enough for just about everybody.
I downloaded, and burned the last release onto CD.
/. community has some insights.
Now I'm having some install problems. The box I'm trying to install to has no floppy drive. The installation tries to find the 'rescue' disk and prompts me to put it into the floppy drive.
This of course is before the installation of the base system. I've looked on the disc[from the prompt], and no image anywhere. So the install farts out and that's it.
I've tried to find a work around on irc, newgroups and the like. No one else seems to have this problem. As I understand it the 'disk' is actually what the CD is booting from.
Does this release fix this problem? Has anyone else had this problem? No one else seems to have this problem... that I've talked to.
I hate to be offtopic here... and I don't mean to point out a problem, and this isn't a troll etc.
I just hope the
I really want to get this RPM'n piece of crap off my box. apt-get packagename is so much easier when the only interface with the box is my Doze machine.
TIA
Get your Unix fortune now!
Debian will use alien to convert RPMs into .debs for the LSB requirement.
There's an old phrase regarding Debian - and that's that the installer is so bad because you only ever need to install once.
That being said, the Potato installer is not maintained anymore - there's a brand new installer for Woody (Debian 3.0).
PRODUCTION SERVERS.
My own workstation is testing/woody, as are most things at home. But test/production servers I leave a Potato because they're configured to do certain things, and I would rather not update stuff (beyond security updates... add that security line to your sources file) on a continous basis, and I want them to be rock solid.
I'd argue that the VAST majority of home/workstation folks are on at least woody, but there are very good reasons/situations to keep boxen off the bleeding (or in woody's case scabbed over) edge.
Conspicuously missing from the list of updates is glibc. Since Red Hat released a security update for the revision used in Potato, I'm assuming that Potato is also vulnerable to the heap corruption bug in glibc's glob() function. The fix is simple, so where's the update? AFAIK, the only major distributions that haven't addressed this problem are Debian and Slackware.
In fact, here are the requirements for a package to make it into a Debian stable revision:
(from http://people.debian.org/~joey/2.2r5/)
[Joey Hess's] requirements for packages to go into stable:
1. The package fixes a security problem. An advisory by our own Security Team would be quite helpful.
2. The package fixes a critical bug which can lead into data loss, data corruption, or an overly broken system, or the package is broken or not usable (anymore).
3. The stable version of the package is not installable at all due to broken or unmet dependencies or broken installation scripts
4. The package gets all architectures in stable in sync.
5. All released architectures have to be in sync.
Look out honey, 'cause I'm using technology; Ain't got time to make no apology
I'd offer you help, but if you don't have time to help yourself, you probably don't have time to get help from someone else (as that might take longer). I'm so sorry you're having problems with what I believe is the best Linux distro out there.
I agree - it makes me a bit of a whiner to complain but not be able to do anything about it.
Let me just ask a general question then - what's the best way to install a fresh Woody system? My current system is a bastardized Potato with some ugly Sid stuff thrown in to make it complicated. I want a Woody system, upgraded to a 2.4 kernel with ipfilter, and I'm willing to start from scratch.
Do I remove all non-Woody sources from the apt-get sources file? Do I manually remove all potato and unstable packages? Or is it best to format and start over?
Do these questions make it obvious that there is some newbie book or documentation that I should be reading?
The biggest problem I have is that this is a P1-100 box, which takes about 3 hours to re-compile the kernel, AND it's my firewall/router, so I lose much of my ability to read net sources when it's down. The current bastardized system is ugly and doesn't do everything I want, but at least it works.
You update /etc/apt/sources.list to whatever distribution you want to upgrade to, and run apt-get update ; apt-get upgrade.
PS: I don't reply to ACs.
Wow, that is awesome, thanks for pointing it out. Is there something like this for Woody?
Re: ISOs:
Limited bandwidth - that's all I have to say. Most people don't need the ISOs.
Re: what Potato comes with
If you had looked around on Usenet for about 2 seconds - I believe it's the second or third post in response to a search for "XFree86 4 potato" you'd find out how to upgrade Potato to Woody (testing) in about 5 minutes.
Edit sources.list, replace stable with Woody.
Apt-get update.
Apt-get dist-upgrade.
Wait, relax, enjoy.
Re: the kernel
Please. A 2.4 kernel isn't THAT necessary.
Ummmm... Woody already has kernel 2.4 in the base distribution.
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
Perhaps you should use the "Viagra" beta boot disks. Much more efficient, I've heard.
Do you like German cars?
The big question is why Woody still has not been released? I thought going to unstable/testing/stable model was supposed to speed up release cycles. Apparently not.
___
If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
actually, apt-get install cruft, and then run cruft. It will remove old programs and libraries that aren't needed that you don't want anymore. It cleaned up my system quite a bit.
Let me just ask a general question then - what's the best way to install a fresh Woody system? My current system is a bastardized Potato with some ugly Sid stuff thrown in to make it complicated. I want a Woody system, upgraded to a 2.4 kernel with ipfilter, and I'm willing to start from scratch.
Do I remove all non-Woody sources from the apt-get sources file? Do I manually remove all potato and unstable packages? Or is it best to format and start over?
First of all, if the only thing you really want is a 2.4.x kernel and ipfilter, you don't need to upgrade everything; you could just get kernel sources, build a 2.4.x kernel, and go from there.
But if you want to update your system, here is what to do:
Edit your sources.list file to point to a Debian mirror for the "unstable" packages. (Or "testing" if you want to try that, but I'm perfectly happy with unstable.)
Run "apt-get update", which fetches the list of new packages.
Run "apt-get dist-upgrade", which downloads the new packages and installs them.
The Debian APT system is really cool, but it isn't absolutely perfect. It will try to install packages like libc first, and then later on install packages that depend on the other packages; but sometimes it fails. Sometimes it will try to install a package, only to have the install fail because some needed package wasn't there. This especially happens when upgrading from Potato to unstable.
The solution is simple: you just keep running "apt-get dist-upgrade", over and over, until it reports that all packages installed. Each time more packages will install, as the dependencies get installed.
I've done this about twice, and that's what worked for me.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
Hey, maybe next time you can do your homework instead of complaining about things you don't understand.
Debian "stable" is famous for being out-of-date. It is also famous for being stable. The two somewhat go together, since Debian doesn't have paid full-time people hammering together updates.
Potato was frozen when the kernel was at 2.2 and Xfree86 was at 3.x. If you want to run Potato, you can get packages for Xfree86 4.1.x and kernel 2.4.x; if you want the latest cutting-edge stuff, all you have to do is update your system.
To update your system:
edit your sources.list to point to a mirror of "unstable", then run "apt-get update", then run the command "apt-get dist-upgrade" over and over until it reports that all packages were installed.
I hope this helps, and maybe next time you won't shoot your mouth off so obnoxiously.
For the love of god... upgrade stable.
Oh gee, what a great idea. Debian wasn't planning to upgrade stable, but now that you suggested it, I'm sure they will get right on it.
Sarcasm aside, if you had taken even a little while to read the debian.org web page, you might have found out that "Woody" is in the middle of a "freeze" process, which will take time... but when it is done, it will become the new "stable" branch.
And apt... what a joke
Actually, it's not a joke. It's one of the best things about Debian, and if you don't like it, maybe you should be running Red Hat. (Red Carpet does some of the same things as APT, but you may wind up having to pay money every month to use it. APT is always free.)
If you want a menu front-end to APT, you have many choices. I like aptitude ("apt-get install aptitude" if you want to try it) but there is also gnome-apt and others.
Your attitude sucks. You ought to work on that.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
[Okay, I'm prepared to lose four karma points over this, offtopic, flamebait, troll, overrated, all the way to -1, just because there are so many damn Debian cheerleaders here and moderation is so damn broken]
.deb packaging moves farther toward the standardization fringes...
The problem with Debian is that it's too stable. What I mean by that is that though Debian does feel very stable, the current release also feels about 5 years behind other Linux operating systems in many ways, while not being all that much more stable than Red Hat, Caldera, or Slackware.
I run Debian on a couple of PowerPC-based Web servers so it's not like I've never used it. I'd run Red Hat or Slackware on them if I could, though.
And dselect has to go. Is there a new installer/package selector coming in the next major release, or will Debian still be the ugliest and clumsiest Linux to install on the face of the earth? Way back at Slackware 2.x, its installer was pretty, powerful, automatable, and easy to use.
Red Hat installs a lot of crap, but it's got a decent record of keeping up on updates in a reasonable amount of time (i.e. no lurking glibc bug) and most of the software around the net will run on it.
Aside from the multi-platform abilities of Debian, I really see no reason to use it, especially as
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
I ran Debian briefly on a Mac Quadra 950 I had kicking around - it was all right, but being more of a BSD guy, I preferred NetBSD.
I actually installed NetBSD on the very same machine you're asking about, a Q700. Go to my site (www.roadflares.org) and check in the "hardware" section for details.
--saint