Slashdot Mirror
Libranet GNU/Linux 2.0 Coming Soon
tal256 writes: "As a proud employee of Libranet, I'm pleased to announce that Libranet has started taking pre-orders for Libranet GNU/Linux 2.0. I feel I should note, of all the vaunted Debian based commercial distributions (Stormix, Corel, Progeny) Libranet is the only one left. We got started before they did and here we still are. Libranet has proven that to stay in the race what you need is a good product rather than millions of dollars behind you; but that's what the world of Free/Open software is all about, isn't it? - Tal" I love Debian, but have never tried Libranet. (The machine I'm typing on was installed with a Stormix CD; my laptop started as a Progeny machine...) Since we seem to be running out of other Debian-based distros, looks like Libranet is my next choice. :)
...is the standard Debian installer that bad? Hmm -- well, yeah.
-- What do you need?
-- Gnus. Lots of Gnus.
I dunno... I'm betting most of the Slashdot'ers can recognize marketing speak. It's strange hearing that language spoken now since the dot bomb. Almost like speaking the language of Mordor. A language I will not utter here. :)
I am Jack's HTTP Server
I am waiting for Xandros :)
And then there's Lindows, but I dont really consider that a linux distro.
Just for your infomation.
What is the point of a debian based commercial linux os? Debian is by far my favorite choice. Getting it setup takes a little bit of time, but once it's running it is really super easy to update and install new software.
apt-get update
apt-get install foo_software
How hard is that? I don't mind paying to support linux, but why am I going to pay for a distribution based on debian, when debian already kicks butt?
And with the work being done on the debian install process it is getting easier all the time.
- I'll bash you in the forhead.
Is Linux really as good as I have heard?
It's better.
"There is a terrorist behind every bush"
Maybe this is why we need the new Debian.
So that anyone can try and Install Debian with little fuss...
AND get a stable system.
Maybe is my local lan ftp / Web server + Domain Controller is on it's way...
Would it run on a P133/24Mo ?
It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
I really like Debian. All my desktops, laptop and servers (I'm a sysadmin) run Debian.
I tried Libranet and went 'wow'. It's userfriendly enough (not like Mandrake, but hey, you get Debian!) to introduce new users to Debian and stable enough to not make those newbies regret it.
It's not bleeding edge (it's mostly the stable debian release with updated packages like recent kernel, X, KDE, Gnome), but more desktop minded than the regular Debian Stable release. I enjoyed when I used it (I wanted more bleeding edge, so I'm running Testing and Sid on my desktops. Yep. Add some lines into the sources.list and apt-get dist-upgrade into it!).
I really want Libranet to succeed (now that progeny is gone).
C.
I recently installed the last verion of Libranet (1.91 or something) on my laptop and it's pretty good. It is more up to date than standard Debian and came with Ximian GNOME already set up. It also has this weird control panel thing that has a few config tools and even a button that will run "make menuconfig" for you so you can recompile your kernel which was kinda neat (but also kinda stupid since its not exactly difficult to type make menuconfig anyway.)
>I feel I should note, of all the vaunted Debian based commercial distributions (Stormix, Corel, Progeny) Libranet is the only one left.
Not quite, Xandros - formel Corel Linux, is coming with a new version within a few weeks, and a beta within a few days.
Remember installing from 0 ?
editing the network config to manually remove the 47 NICs it installed ?
Moving a small (1k) file to the proper directory to make it work ?
...
I speak about all those "small" problems that always made a Debian install a 3 days - 5 kilos printed paper affair...
At least for me 8)
It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
First: I really like the idea of open source and think thats it a big step towards better software.
Second: Big distributions like Red Hat, Suse and others have really great people working there. That is why I buy both Red Hat and Suse, not because I run them, but because they make GPL licensed software. Which means in the end that I can run them on my debian system.
Third: I know that my money put in distributions is well spent because the software is open source. Opposed to buying propietary software, where it feels like they are only after the money. They can also charge unreasanable high prices because they _own_ the right for the software.
Anyone care to tell me what is so special about this distribution apart from its name (Libranet GNU/Linux)?
Choice of distro's is great but I can't honestly see what good this will do. No offence to the Libranet employees.
Why can't people start creating new (even commercial) applications on top of Linux istead of just releasing distro's?
I've read a post here asking why bother with a commercial Debian distro, let me explain:
e t1 90/index.shtml
l
I have been a Linux user for about 4 and a half years now. In this time I've run the gamut, bouncing from distribution to distribution. For the last year and a half I've stuck with Debian. Why? It's stable, fast, light, well integrated and, if you use Testing, Sid or Ximian with Potato, very up to date. After getting used to Debian's quirks there's no going back for me. I played with RH7.2 lately, but I miss being able to decide that I need a new compiler and then being able to apt-get it.
Great, so that's why to bother with Debian. If you want more reasons please see the links below.
Okay, so why a commercial Debian? For convenience. Libranet adds a really nice adminmenu that consolidates pretty much every aspect of system management, from kernel compilation to X setup, to adding new users, changing your clock or setting up a DSL connection. It's all there in one spot. In addition, the setup is a little simpler than Debian's. Personally, I don't have a huge problem With the Debian installer. What it lacks in looks and polish it more than makes up for in flexibility. It's a great base installer. What Libranet has done is slightly massage it, rather than completely replacing it. This makes the parts that normally trip up new users go away, but still retains much of the underlying flexibility.
Another reason for Libranet is the initial package selection. If you're new to Linux, Debian can be a little... stark. Libranet bundles packages into sections and asks you easy questions like: Do you need a web server? Or, Should I install Office Suites. It's a little thing, but it's nice.
Then there's their support. The small knowledge base succinctly answers 90% of all new questions. Things like "How do I set up ADSL?" or "How do I share my internet connection?" are there, with very simple step-by-step guides on how to accomplish each task. If you need to ask them a question they will get back to you pretty much within a day. It's a small operation (about 6 people, I think.) and they have a nice personal touch.
Finally, at least with 1.9.1, they have kept a solid base (Potato) and added to it. They added reiserfs support, Kernel 2.4, XFree86 4.x, KDE 2.1, and Ximian Gnome. All of this can be done with pure Debian Potato, but it means understanding apt, searching out unofficial apt lines, manually configuring or even compiling packages. Libranet took this all away.
In short, Libranet is important because it takes away the annoying details.
Pure Debian most definitely has it's place. I use it on a laptop with an old video card and no CD-ROM, and have used it for an Alpha and NetWinder that I own. However, for end users who either don't want to learn what each package does or who want to save a bunch of time by letting someone else make some pretty safe assumptions, a commercial Debian distro such as Libranet is the way to go.
Okay, here are some links:
A bunch of testimonials from Libranet customers:
http://www.libranet.com/testimonials.html
Here's a review of 1.9.0:
http://www.thedukeofurl.org/reviews/misc/libran
Debian for BeOS users:
http://tinyplanet.ca/pubs/debian/html/book1.htm
Reasons I like Debian: (Shameless self-promotion)
http://www.moses.cx/reviews/debian/debian.php
Took a quick look at the website, but I couldn't find any information about what software the new version includes?
Does it include the latest Xfree - what version of KDE? Gnome? Whatever?
Is it KDE or GNOME centric?
feel I should note, of all the vaunted Debian based commercial distributions (Stormix, Corel, Progeny) Libranet is the only one left.
I do believe trustix is based on Debian. And it is a commercial distribution.
God knows I love linux, but each time I see one of these distro screenshots, I turn my head 90 degrees towards my powerbookG4 with my external cinema display and say to myself "jezus, those apple interface design guys are good !"
I wonder why there aren't any good graphic designers addicted to linux, so that eventually, we'll get some kick ass graphics too..
When will I end this grieving ? When will my future begin ?
ftp.metalab.unc.edu/pub/Linux/distributions/libran et
"Good is our Linux distribution! Powerful it is!"
Thanks for the update, Yoda.
What is the difference between a Debian based Linux distro and say Red Hat or Mandrake? Is the Debian based easier to administer (more powerful)? I've noticed RH and Man. doing some funny setup of directory structure and applications, do the Debian based distros go with some predefined standard?
~ now you know
You can download Libranet 1.9.1. If you installed and liked that version, then it would follow that you would like the new and improved version as well.
Brandon Tallent.
This is where I disagree. Yes, Corel made certain things like installation easier but Corel gave up quickly after the distro was released. Users wanting security upgrades were up the creek. So even if users knew about security it was by no means easy to get updates from Corel.
For the parent, I will have to agree. I think that Debian-based distros have an uphill battle to fight when competing against normal Debian, but in all fairness, thats not who they compete against. The Debian developers just make a solid distro regardless of deadlines and marketing. Thats great for us knowledgeable folk, but newer users need a little more help.
Since the submitter works there and all...
Any chance of this getting ported to other architectures? I'd love to try it out, but my only Linux box (currently running Debian) is a m68k machine.
(Come to think of it, Debian is the _only_ native English m68k Linux distro. Possible market?)
--saint
My first Debian system started life as a Coral Linux install - I edited /etc/apt/sources.list to point at debian/unstable, did an apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade, and 80MB or so later I had a real Debian system.
I dare say you can do similar things with this.
Actually, apt will tell you everything it is going to do, before it does it. If anything it's going to do is more than you asked for (e.g. adding or upgrading an extra package to satisfy a dependency or removing one to satisfy a conflict), it will ask you for confirmation before it starts.
It leaves behind all the packages it downloads, until you tell it to get rid of them (all of them, or only those that aren't currently installed), so, if need be, you can go back to previous versions.
There's a difference between automating tedious tasks and hiding them. But, hey, if you wanna playing the "rpm -i"/find dependencies/download dependencies/reapeat game, be my guest. Just don't pretend that it's an informed decision, okay?
Since we seem to be running out of other Debian-based distros, looks like Libranet is my next choice. :)
:)
See subject
May we live long and die out
The 'download' link only lets you get ISOs for the previous version and says that version 2 is available on CD only. Doesn't the GPL say that they have to make it available for download?
So about the modifications to the standard Debian installer and the graphical configuration bits.. are they released under GPL? Then somebody in the Debian project needs to integrate them into the standard distribution, even if optional. Debian is great for newbies if you can just get them over the first hurdle.
Why should I buy Libranet?
Simply put, this is the best desktop system available.
Bold Statement...
"It takes many nails to build a crib, but one screw to fill it."
I suggest taking a look at floppyfw. They ripped out a lot of the rc.d stuff there to get to a simpler (well, easier to trace through and figure out) initialization scripts.
.iso of it, email me if you are insterested.
I would start with that, and install it on a harddrive, and gradually start adding things until you had all the necessary tools to compile and built a copy of it yourself. Trim down and consolidate the start scripts until you have something you like.
However, I suspect that you will find that the runlevel style initialization scripts are there for a reason. One does need some way to organize all that stuff. You can easily (well, a few weekends and evenings of piddling around) build what you describe. However, you will find that you are re-doing too much of the distro each time you add a package. If other people start using it, and adding packages that you never heard of (like some random database server or something) and start them up automatically, you will swiftly get pissed at the whole situation (especially when they send you email accusing you writing a broken linux or whatever) and decide that the init.d scripts weren't so bad after all.
And about the hundredth time you install something just to find out some arcane library needs and updated version, or the hundreth time you tell some other user that he can't install LyX without having xforms, you will also see the goodness of package system.
Check out a linux based on the BSD ports system, Gentoo I think is the most common one. Maybe that will give you enough to satisfy.
Another route is to stick with DOS, and get the Free Software Foundation's book and CD "GNU Tools for MS-Windows and MS-DOS." This is a set of all the standard GNU tools (emacs, perl, bash, gcc, sed, awk, latex, etc) compiled for DOS and put in a nice package with an installation program. I have purchased several copies of this from the FSF by mail order. If you want a copy of the CD, I may be able to get you the
Oh and one last thing -- whoever modded the parent comment as a troll should be $rbtl'd or whatever it is, or have their account set to put all page-widening posts at +5 Insightful.
All it says is that if you distribute the binary, you must provide the source - it says nothing about how that source is to be provided (if it was cost effective, they could provide it as one long printout, or a huge deck of punch cards, or on paper tape), as long as it is made available.
You can charge for that source code, but only a fee that would cover the cost of distribution, etc (so, in theory, they could print it all out and give it to you that way, then charge you for paper, ink, electricity, management fees, and shipping and handling - and be legit according to the license - I think the wording is there to prevent "gouging").
Typically, the GPL wants the code to be "with" the binary - ie, distributed at the same time, preferable on the same media as the binary - and that is what we typically see.
But if a company only releases a CD of the binary, they have to give the end user a 3 year term, minimum, to request the source code if they so want it. What is interesting about this clause is that you could distribute a binary only system, and given the proper docs (ie, including copies of the GPL, etc), leave it up to the users, those who care, to ask for the source - instead of just handing it to them whether they want it or not. I am not sure, but I think there is a grain of a valid business method in that...
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
I like APT but there's a couple of reasons why I stick with Red Hat - I like their current yet well tested AC kernels, kudzu, setup, installer and a couple of other tools. Its always nice to just buy a network card and install it by sticking it in my damned machine and turning back on - no hunting for which driver module matches the hardware. A lot of software (Open Source apps like FreeSWAN, closed source apps like Kylix) seem to be tested on RH before other Linux distributions.
Anyway, APT has been available for Red Hat for some time now and its how I update most o my boxes. There's a few good publically avaliable repositories and more on the way - namely all the Red Hat CDs, all the updates as they come out, FreshRPMs, and Gnomehide. I have around 2.8GB of (binary) software from 9 different sources on an APT repository I maintain at my workplace, all of which are tested against 7.2. Sure, 2.8 is less than 6GB (the amount on Debian repositories), but its got everythign we need - acroread, postfix, enhydra, kylix open edition, just about everything else.
There's also the fact that the ability to install RPM packages is part of the LSB, and alien doesn't seem to handle this reliably.
If you're interested, download apt packages from Freshrpms
My favorite Debian based distro in GNU/Linux.
War crimes, torture, lies, illegal spying... Would someone give Bush a blowjob, already, so he can be impeached?