Slashdot Mirror
Debian 3.0 (Woody) May 1?
dex@ruunat noted that this morning, in a message to the debian-devel-announce mailing list, Anthony Towns, Debian's Release Manager, wrote: "I'm becoming increasingly confident in woody's release
readiness. So, to go out on a limb: Debian 3.0 (codenamed woody) will release on May 1st, 2002."
Congrats to all the debheads putting this thing together. I have a blank
CDR waiting ;)
There's still time to get Apache 2.0 in there!! :)
3.0 now? Why dont they follow the kernel version numbers? Would be so much easier for the rest of us ....
I have a blank CDR waiting ;) ;-)
Just one?
How does Debian compare to Mandrake 8.2?
like a fox..
I'm confident in my woody as well, so much so I'm ready to release it too!
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
One blank CD-R? Try eight! If you look at any of the unofficial builds, they take up a massive amount of space.
Will they pare it down for the official release? (Offer certain packages only online?)
Justin
"Why would God give us a waist if we wasn't supposed to rest our pants on it?" - Rev. Roy McDaniels
As a user, I'm pretty confident in woody, I'm using it myself at work at at home, even on a production webserver. It's testing pretty damn solid as far as I can tell.
Been using woody on half a dozen desktops at work, for about 6 months and while at first there were definite gnome problems which thankfully have dissapeared waaay into the past. And it's a pity that galeon wont be there, but I suppose it is a little unstable (gotta love the crash recovery though!)
The really interesting thing to see is what kernel they're going to use with it, anybody know? I'm sure its on the mailing lists if I could be bothered to check.
On a 28.8. Screw getting that.
Can i install it on my woody?
> 1. su&&yes|rm -R /
;)
...
> 4. Insert Windows XP CD
...
> 6. USE YOUR COMPUTER WITH EASE
Give a mechanic a car that you can't open the hood on, and he'll find it sooo much easier
I wish I could open up my OS.. oh hang on... I can!
as a door stop.
"I did this 'cause Linux gives me a woody."
Dave '-ddt->` Taylor, announcing DOOM for Linux
Of course the impact is more psychological than anything else. Isn't every one running Debian running Woody anyway?
Don't get me wrong -- this is a minor bitch about an otherwise great distro, and it's very much IMNSHO. I seem to be moving more and more to FreeBSD these days, but whenever I need or want Linux I always pick Debian. It's easy, it's stable, I absolutely love apt-get install/dist-upgrade, and and and...yeah, it's pretty much all great. I think I'll be waiting w/CD-R in hand, too.
(One other minor complaint, something I found on my box at work: why the hell does suidperl conflict with lynx? I had to install lynx from source, because Debian kept removing it when I installed suidperl for a webmail package I was testing. Anyone?)
Carousel is a lie!
Does it come with kde 2.2.2 or 3.0?
Funny.. in 5 years of Linux use, I have yet to see a kernel segfault.
:
:)
Oh, and you missed a step
3.5 - Go to local PC shop, and buy a copy of Windows XP Professional for the princely sum of $296.99 (not the upgrade).
Alternatively you could spend the same money on Blank CD-R's (going by Amazons prices, I estimate you could get about 740) and burn many many copies of Linux for you and your friends
If you were REALLY against free software, you could even sell them at $1/CD and you would make a tidy profit.
"Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
Being so close to the kernel version numbers was confusing. Potato (Debian 2.2) actually works with 2.0, 2.1, and 2.2 kernels. With some updates it'll run with 2.4 kernels as well. If we call woody 3.0, then it's very clear that the number is not related to the kernel. Until we get Linux 3.0 of course :-)
Slackware is my favorit distrobution. But it has one dark spot. It went from 3.x to 7.0 and upset a lot of people with version bloat. At least Debian has a chance not to make that same error as it moves into the 3.x tree.
Good luck debian. You are my second favorit and I wish you well with the new 3.0.
Ascii artist &
I did a fresh install of Woody (debian/testing) on one of my machines this morning and it seems the pine and pico sources have disappeared from the packages list. Yes, I do use non-US and non-free packages so that can't be the problem.
For the rest, it runs quite well, but I still prefer debian/unstable because of the more recent packages.
Does this "Windows XP" you speak of work on my Pentium 66mhz machine? Because I use that as my IP Masquerading firewall and FTP/SSH server and I think it needs an upgrade. It has 250mb of HDD space and 32mb of RAM, will Windows XP suffice? Does it do IP Masquerading properly?
Oh and also, will it run on my two Apple machines? I might look into it.
I admit I never used Debian, but I'm entirely confused as to what the problem is here. I see no purpose of duplicating the source in a so-called "deb" file, when all users of every Unix including Mac OS X can get the Pine source in it's raw, unaldultered form from the official site. If Debian and Red Hat keep their monopolistic packaging formats up, what does this mean for official distribution sites? Will they fade into obscurity?
if you have a fast connection. if not you might want to build a local repository. this would take much more than one cdr. apt-getting 600 megs of stuff over a modem is not a happy thing.
on a side note. many people say with respect to debian: just apt-get blah and it will install it. they never say apt-get blah and if it fails try apt-get -f. if that fails try touching the file it's looking for, etc. point: apt-get doesnt work 100% of the time-especially when you're not using potato. when it fails, a new user will find it confusing and might be turned off by all the posts where people say: oh well that always works fine for me.
this is not a troll, but a serious comment. apt is a great thing, and when it works correctly it is wonderful. this is also not ment to slight the debian developers. they work hard to make sure all the packages work together and all of the dependancies are met.
-- john
something seems wrong with that statement.
:)
I mean, yes, debian is easy to use, and upgrade, it's installation is fun, and it turns on quicker than my girlfriend, but does it really diserve wood?
ok, well, yea, I guess so. I'm sooo gonna download and burn it the second I can... or maybe I should just dist-upgrade...
congrats guys, I'll be looking foreward to see if it comes with kde3.0 apache 2.0 and mozilla 1.0
:)
Looking for Book Reviews? Check out Literary Escapism.
Which kernel would that be? A BSD kernel perhaps? OpenBSD is at 3.0 last I checked, so that works out, unless you believe that Debian/NetBSD is more realistic.
Facetious, perhaps, but you fail to acknowlegde that Debian is a "kernel independant Operating System" that is popularly based on Linux. There is nothing stopping debian users from chosing KDE if that is their preferred desktop environment, just as there is nothing stopping x86 users from choosing The Hurd if their hardware supports it.
Debian has a larger scope then you seem to realize. Distinction from the Linux kernel is the best reason I can see for supporting a Major release increment to 3.0, as otherwise I would much prefer a more conservative path better utilizing the range of our decimal counting system under the auspices of 2.x.
While I hope my post has contained a modicum of sensibility, I fear that this is not the case.
woody comming out ?
gnome 2.0 comming out ?
what else ?
Smile... tomorrow will be worse.
Please, just try a netinst image.
It's about 30MB, and only retrieves the necessary packages off of the internet / other sources.
Not planned:
-KDE 3.0
-Apache 2.0
-XFree 4.2
Not good, eh?
have you been defaced today?
Hasn't anyone told the Debian team that April Fools jokes are meant to occur on *April* 1st, not May 1st? ;-)
No, seriously, this is great news. Been using Woody for 3 weeks now & am *sooooo* pleased that I^Hsomething trashed my Mandrake setup for it. I last used Debian in the 1.3 days and wish I never left it.
It says a lot when even the "Testing" branch of a distribution is far more stable than the so-called "Production" versions of others.
PINE has simply been scuttled by Debian because of the incessant security issues. In fact the Debian community is thing of EXIM *ooo boy* right now and the debate on several lists goes on. If you want PINE, all you have to do is to go shopping at the tarPits and install the generic from a tar file. I personally have the tarriest Debian install I've ever seen. BTW if you do a Mozilla update via apt/dselect, your Galeon will be automatically unstalled in the process too, because Galeon too has been relagated to the Debian graveyard until futher resurrection notices.
Rien n'est plus beau que le creux du 0.
Fromo .h tml
http://packages.debian.org/unstable/editors/nan
"GNU nano is a free replacement for Pico, the default Pine editor. Pine is copyrighted under a slightly restrictive license, that makes it unsuitable for Debian's main section. GNU nano is an effort to provide a Pico-like editor, but also includes some features that were missing in the original, such as 'search and replace', 'goto line' or internationalization support. As it's written from scratch, it's smaller and faster.
"
Amazon is a rip off. The current price of blank CD-Rs minimums out at around 20cents. With $296.99, you could get 1484.95 CD-Rs. And I would not suggest selling CDs at $1. As an avid burner who works with copyrighted music and software on a daily basis, I can say collusion plays an important part in setting the price of intellectual property. So do us all a favor and sell your bootlegs for $2 each - that's the street price here in California, it's the street price in Kiev ($3 if you want it on a pressed CD instead of a CD-R, plus the high-res cover scans and a high-quality jewel case).
Don't forget, after the installation of XP, the CD may be used as a necklace for any pinhead gullible enough to install Micro$lop products.
Rien n'est plus beau que le creux du 0.
What about Buzz, the LGM's, and the rest of the Toy Story crew? Oh wait.
Nah, but seriously. It's nice to see another distribution without necessarily the weight of a Red Hat continuing on.
-p
What a waste of a perfectly good CD! I would prefer to precisely scratch the reflective media off using a microscope and write a script to read the bad sectors. Then you could store DeCSS or even the Linux kernel superimposed on an XP CD. Who says trash CDs are useless?
What do you think of MusicCity now?
*sigh* well, I will download a tarball of pine in that case. Maybe this is one of the disadvantages of Debian (and some other distro's too), developers making the choice which packages to include in their distro and which not, even though some of their users want something else... Maybe there's a RPM available so that I can convert it to a DEB using alien...
gnome 2.0
kde 3.0
mozilla 1.0
apache 2.0
xfree86 4.2
kernel 2.4
it pisses me off that stable stuff doesn't get into debian. I mean, do they really think that mozilla-m18, which is in debian/stable, is more stable or usable than 1.0?! Or that gnome 1.0.55 is better than gnome-1.4.0. I'd rather see more attention being paid to getting new versions ready in stable than wasting time backporting fixes.
LOL.... I like your spirit!!! Now the question is, what to do with Anonymous Coward's PC after he trashes it by installing XP on it. I was thinking in the line of a good hammer or possibly a cup of graphite dust sucked in by the input fan.
Rien n'est plus beau que le creux du 0.
I guess for most users, it would make more sense to name the distribution after which version of Gnome or KDE that is bundled.
From a technical point of view, the most important single package is probably glibc, as that is what most other packages talk to.
If they should name it for my convenience, they should call it Debian 21. It will be the first stable Debian featuring Emacs 21, which is my primary interface to the system.
You don't have to put up with the shlt provided by your chosen distributor. Boycott distro-specific packages, support tarballs!
Earlier, somebody mentioned galeon will not be in Woody, but last I checked, galeon is still there. Personally, I think it would be cool if they waited for Mozilla 1.0 to get out first, and release it with galeon.
> su&&yes|rm -R /
mboeh@motherlovebone~% su && yes | rm -R /
Password:
motherlovebone:/home/mboeh#
Doesn't work for me!
Last time I installed Woody, about 2 months ago, the kernel was still at 2.2.20. Have they finally gone 2.4.x yet?
(I've sinced moved on to Unstable and use my own kernel)
Why not release it a day before, so we can have Mozilla 1.0, KDE 3.0, Apache 2.0 and Debian 3.0 all on the same month?
Right now, the non-x86 developers are furiously trying to compile/patch a few pesky yet important packages on whatever platform they work with. I have been using 3.0 "testing" for over six months, and have Linux and Hurd working on X86, and Linux on a HP 9000 715/80 PA-RISC box, and a StrongARM SA110 Netwinder machine. In each case it works great! "Unstable" is a misnomer in that the OS itself is not unstable (doesn't crash), what is unstable is that the packages are constantly being updated so an apt-get upgrade might list 1000 new updated packages every week! With something like 9500 packages in Woody there is a lot going on all the time.
Clickety Click
I was running XFree 4.0 on Potato with a 2.4 kernel a long time ago. Just compile the stuff and stick it in /usr/local. You don't have to use just Debian packages. Its compiler setup is great and it is trivial to compile most tarballs.
Clickety Click
I see no purpose of duplicating the source in a so-called "deb" file, when all users of every Unix including Mac OS X can get the Pine source in it's raw, unaldultered form from the official site
Let's say you want the sources for six different packages. Let's also say you want to keep them current.
With Debian source packages, you use "apt-get" or some other tool to subscribe to those packages, and then every time you update your system, you get the latest versions of those packages. (The latest versions in Debian, of course.) I update my system at least once per week; would you prefer to run an updating tool once per week, or would you prefer to visit six different FTP servers once per week?
And the source packages always reflect the source used to build the matching binary packages. If there were no source packages, and you wanted to build a package yourself, you would need to seek out the exact version on your system. Maybe you just want the newest version, so it may be no problem, but what if you have a computer running an older version and you just want that source version?
Debian's "stable" version has stable packages. If the "raw, unadulterated version from the official site" has a bug introduced in a new version, you will get that bug if you get the new version; with Debian, you won't get that bug in the "stable" version of the system because people will check it out and will not include it. (If you really want it, you can pull it in from the "unstable" version of Debian. So there is no down side.)
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
So much for seeing KDE3 in there.
Ah well, I'm sure someone will put up a separate apt source or something for it. I'd be pretty disappointed if they stuck KDE3 in there to be honest... that's the sort of thing that requires a ton of testing.
If you'd looked at the package listing you would have seen a whole bunch of 2.4 kernels all ready for you to install. Most of us compile our own kernels from source anyways to optimize it for our own particular hardware sets.
Clickety Click
Actually Galeon is not completely dead in Debian. You can install it from the unstable tree. Also it will only uninstall Galeon if Mozilla increases by a milestone, ie .9.8-.9.9.
Disclamer - Opinion of Person
Not only does some moderator need a flogging, but this post should be distilled into a Slashdot Advocacy summary that all Debian Related Slashdot News items automatically link to. This would really make the comments for Debian items much less trifling.
I'd remove all of the political/economic theory references in the first point, and maybe just illustrate how Debian quality isn't compromised by profit-motive based considerations, or externally imposed deadlines.
Also worth mentioning is that Debian is not Linux, unless you want it to use Linux. If it can be phrased lucidly and marketably, a bullet might be spared for the "Open Organization" of the Debian Project, with it's clear policy and democratic operation which gave rise to "Open Source" as we know it today. That last bit might not be worth mentioning, as this document would ideally be less propeganda than a premptive strike against ad Nauseam misguided advocacy and "Linux" postings in Debian topics.
If such a document were to be made, would there be any way to float it by the Slashdot powers that be? If I weren't wasting my time, I'd gladly write it, and submit it to Debian Proper for approval. Is there any red tape trail that might end with an automatic footnote/link to Debian related items on Slashdot?
For those of you who are unhappy with the purity aspects of Debian there is at least one place that I have found that has some unofficial packages like mplayer and the flash plugin for Mozilla.
I haven't had any problems with the packaging that has done by the maintainer.
Disclamer - Opinion of Person
Yes, I have heard that there are bf- prefixed images that have the 2.4 kernel and ReiserFS/ext3 support.
I have been patient with Debian. I have been persistent with Debian. I come bearing the news to Debian webmasters everywhere that the "bf-something Woody install" is not obvious. Not only in name obscurity when a Debian newbie would only know to look for 2.2 or 3.0 disc images, but also in placement on the website.
I have gone searching in vain for this bf-something install. I have looked in all of the obvious places on the website under such topics as "Getting Debian," "Debian on CD," and ""Download with FTP." This is bullshit. If this is everyone's definition of publically available, I must have missed that day of class. I even download some of those potentially nifty netinstall CD images in the hopes that they simply weren't labelled correctly with the magical bf- prefix.
Believe me, I have gone through a lot more effort than most casual visitors to the Debian site would have gone through. Unfortunately this is one area that Debian could learn from RedHat, Mandrake, SuSe, et al in that the others provide an iso image, you download it, you burn it, and off you go. If the newer install with the updated kernel works so well, why hasn't the old installer been mothballed? Why would the old installer be offered? If the new installer has problems that preclude its replacement of the old installer, then the appropriate answer to my previous post would have been "they're working on it and it should be ready when 3.0 is released."
Is it a work in progress? Sure! I acknowledge that. I am used to that. I have no illusions that any Linux distribution is without its rough edges. But how much effort is it really to have in the download area, clearer instructions for creating a up-to-date install disc? All I see is the same old crap that makes me jump through hoops and auto-detects nothing (another gripe that I will forget for now simply because I know my hardware well enought to answer the endless series of questions) while making use of journalled filesystems far from the simple case it should be.
By all means, prove me wrong. By all means, show me an obvious link that demonstrates me to be a dullard who cannot read a web page. I am not above humility. Otherwise I will assume that a clean and complete Debian install is bullshit, must first be excavated by a Debian veteran who knows how to find it, and/or is of no use to the general public. Debian may be a great distribution, but that's pointless if most people can't install easily without sacrificing popular features (like journalled filesystems) or hunting through mailing list archives without really knowing for what they search.
- I don't need to go outside, my CRT tan'll do me just fine.
There are also options for ReiserFS and XFS but I haven't toyes with those. Ext3 is easy and probably safer.
If you can't recompile a kernel maybe you better stick to RedHat.
Clickety Click
There was a nifty presentation given in support of Debian/OpenBSD, which likely still has the slides available for browsing via the web. Since then, it seems that Debian/NetBSD has more chance of (initial) implementation.
I am pleased as well, because AFAI can tell, NetBSD has a bit more to offer Debian than OpenBSD at the moment. This is in no way a value judgement of the merits of OpenBSD versus NetBSD; I actually slightly prefer OpenBSD at the moment as a distinct OS. But it looks to me that NetBSD has a few architecture related bits that if incorporated into Debian could prove fruitful for the entire Debian Universe. Foremost is their modular alternative to Debian's vestigal runlevels. To date, NetBSD still offers greater architectural diversity than OpenBSD for maximal Debian distribution. Finally, OpenBSD's strongest trait, Security through correctness, would definitely be shattered by tearing the OBSD kernel from its solid and familiar userland, and abandoning it, dazed and confused, into the wild forests of Debian. NetBSD is a much more suitable candidate for transplant to date.
After the initial foray into BSD, then the further effort to incorporate OpenBSD and FreeBSD kernels will be much less daunting. Out of curiosity, where is Debian for OpenBSd offered?
One thing that baffles me to date, is why would anybody want a FreeBSD kernel in Debian? I'm not too clear on what Debian/FreeBSD has to offer that couldn't be better had elsewhere. After all, the Userland would still be Debian. Linux is IMHO more SMP accomplished than FreeBSD. What else does the FreeBSD kernel offer that can't be had in NetBSD or OpenBSD?
-castlan
Was that "Woody" is such a major improvement over "Potato" that they felt it was justifiable to go to the next major version number; i.e. 3.0.
Clickety Click
try this package: http://packages.debian.org/testing/admin/pine-trac ker.html
Desperation is a stinky cologne
If you updating using apt-get update instead of dselect, it won't remove galeon at all - it'll put mozilla on hold until the packages are in sync.
Desperation is a stinky cologne
Also, the GNU Public License (GPL) requires you to release source code when you release a binary package. The .DEB source packages comply with this requirement.
Also, the Debian project has mirror servers all throughout the world. If I made some package that went into Debian, I would want the world to use Debian servers to grab the source, rather than having the whole world beat on my FTP server every time I came out with something new.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
One of the things Debian people were supposed to fix was the abyssmally slow release cycle. Well, it's still abyssmally slow.
___
If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
apt-get build-dep pine
apt-get source --compile pine
dpkg --install *.deb
There's also a pine-tracker package, which apparently reminds you to upgrade when appropriate. I hope the standard tools make this unnecessary some day.
The evaluation of an action as 'practical' . . . depends on what it is that one wishes to practice.
DanielS is spot on again - a stable release should be about being able to get things done with no crashes, no segfaults and no bugs whatsoever. In terms of productivity, KDE3 doesn't offer *that much* over KDE 2.2.2, and so there isn't any point in rushing it. I would rather have KDE 2.2.2 packages that work than broken KDE 3 packages. People moan about KDE 3 debs not being available yet, but then you just have to look at the problems Mandrake users are having with their 8.2 RPMs which screw up their existing installation...
Debian is still very left wing: First of May, Labour's day.
Debian is the only "free" distribution of Linux. It's very stable and carefully build.
Debian is independent from business strategys.
No beginner's choice
Any post containing the following words should be automatically deleted:
FUD
bzzzzt!
WRONG (only when used to start a post)
l33t (or any variant of it)
and of course,
Zealot
Wait until you exit that shell!
None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
First of all, this has nothing to do with "learning apt." apt is dead simple to use to install and remove packages, which is what most people do anyway. Regardless, it's not like you hit one wrong button, you'd have to type in "apt-get install" and then the package name, that's pretty complex, and you'd have to be stupid to do it accidentally or something. Even if you start downloading 500MB, it's not like you can't--OH WOW--press Ctrl-C and get out of the download.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." - Thomas Jefferson
Heh, woddy..let's all get woody!
what's micro$lop? i've never heard of them.
this sig limit is too small to put anything good h
You can open it up and look at it like a dazed and confused newborn. Big deal.
Way to piss out on someone's joke, btw.
Funny, in nine years of linux use, I have yet to see a kernel segault...
But I've seen it hang and die several times.
Yes ofcourse, but this source package seems to have disappeared also... anyway, I went and compiled and installed pico and pine using the source tarball from the pine site. Worked for me.
The problem, as I understand it, is that the Univerity of Washinton have an anal attitude to allowing the redistribution of binaries, hence the source only distribution by Debian.
Of course this puts pine into the "non-free" section, so pine is not part of the official Debian distribution, and as such will not get onto Debian CDs until UoW changes their license.
Personally, I'd recomment finding a MUA that's got a sensible licensing policy instead, so you don't have to put up with this nonsense
Debian: GNU/Linux done the Linux way
This is of course the type of thing that makes the LinuxFromScratch distribution so popular. However, would you suggest setting up a Debian box manually without an install program? Just compile and install the basic system utilites. Compile and install dpkg, apt, dselect, and the rest.
My point is that when I want to learn more about the inner workings of Linux in order to look behind the curtain, I use LinuxFromScratch. Unfortunately LFS doesn't scale when you want to setup more than one box (dozens, hundreds, thousands, etc.). No one uses LFS for a company-wide install because it would be a huge timesink on install and a maintenance headache for IT after it's deployed. After all, how can you be sure that they are all the same configuration if they are all done by hand? People make mistakes. This is another reason why installers exist (It's the primary reason computers exist, but that's another argument). People have already written fine installers for Linux that simplify the process and let people get to what they want to do which most likely does not include hacking the inner workings of Linux. They want to get the web site up, the mail server up. They want to get on with their job which quite often has nothing to do with computers.
You shouldn't have to be an expert with Linux or be a programmer in order to use Linux. You shouldn't even have to be a novice if it's just a workstation. You should be knowledgable if setting up a server -- especially if it's connected to the Net -- but a workstation? Can I do it? Sure. Do I want to go through this just to use another distribution? Hell no!
Take a cue from SuSe: bootable CD that lets you demo Linux without even installing. Why? Because unless the user gets past the install process easily, technical superiority be damned, the user won't be using it long enough to recognize it as better.
- I don't need to go outside, my CRT tan'll do me just fine.
It's in testing. Where is it missing?
The evaluation of an action as 'practical' . . . depends on what it is that one wishes to practice.
By the time they get there release out, its already 2 years out of date anyway. I will stick with a distro thats a little more up to date. Sure, apt-get is great, but thats all debian has.
What do you mean **friends**..?? I have no friends !!! LOL Unless, of course, you want to apply. I just looooove when you talk bad to me!!!! Gimme more!!!!! *pant*.... *sigh* BTW, How does the necklace fit?
Rien n'est plus beau que le creux du 0.
No, you can be dazed and confused. Don't project your degree of comprehension on others.
micro$lop is a cult-like, and quasi-esoteric organisation which is located simultaneously in two territories, muck like Schroedinger's cat. One such territory is somewhere in a state of Redmyneck, in the perpetual state of Washandpatchaton. The other virtual territory is located in the collective emptiness found between the ears of devoted members of the Cult in question. The two leaders of the Org are named Bomber and Grates, two individuals so spiritually advanced that they are beyond any Law structure known to mankind. The organization continues to recrute members from the 80% of the world's population who have a below normal intelligence, in other words, those who unwittingly pay for everything without questioning. These folks are necessary for the survival of the rest of us who are here for the free ride, our primary moral oblgation.
Rien n'est plus beau que le creux du 0.
Oooooooops ThanX for the info.... Forgot about the milestone trip... DUH
Rien n'est plus beau que le creux du 0.
Wow, you just delivered a fistfull of enlightenment right there. Now Slackware feels that much more hollow, in comparison to the now validated Redhat versioning scheme. I swear, Redhat keeps making it harder for me to irrationally hate them.
Now maybe Slackware should just jump on the abandoned bankwagon and call the last release slack2k. Maybe Slackware XP would be a nice meaningful release name. Or Slackware: Inflation Edition. They could borrow the hot air baloon logo from Corel.
Hey, I guess I have no problem kicking Slack while they're down. Whenever I feel that Debian leaping to 3.0 is excessive, I look for Slackware to keep myself in check. Wow, that 8.0 was generations better than before. At least they're modest about it.
Yeah yeah, i know Slack kicks SLS's ass. Sure, Slack is basically one dude. But with Redhat being all mutre, I've got to find some Major Linux Distro to hate. Bitching about handouts, it's what makes Free Software great!
http://people.debian.org/~joey/2.2r6/
Gobs of security fixes, few misc fixes, stability fixed. 2.2r6 is the second update of Potato in 2002. Not exactly cold.
BTW, it's the GNU General Public Licence
The ability to monopolize an industry is insignificant, next to the power of the source.
This is a very important question!
At long last! Not the most elegant or obvious solution (in my opinion) but quite acceptable under the circumstances (I already have copies of the netinstall CDs).
Thank you very much!
- I don't need to go outside, my CRT tan'll do me just fine.
Oh sure, you may be able to download other distros without paying anything. But every other (mainstream) distro is still the product of a single business, whereas Debian is, and always will be, a 100% volunteer, no-company-making-the-rules distro. That alone will keep me a Debian user for the forseeable future.
rm -rf
rather than:
yes | rm -r
But, that would just erase all your files on all your partitions, if you want to uninstall everything you can use fdisk to delete your mbr and delete all your partitions.
There are 2 kinds of people in this world: Those who write in decimal and those who don't
Looking at:m ain/b inary-i386/Packages
http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/dists/woody/
I see both gcc 2.95 and gcc 3.0 are included as part of the standard packages. But my question is this:
which version of gcc will be used to compile the binary (precompiled) release of Debian 3.0?
Huh? I just did a dist-upgrade to unstable last night, and got moz 0.9.9 and galeon 1.2 to go with it.
If you apt-get install mozilla first and mozilla has had a milestone update then it will remove galeon. I don't use dselect when dealing with unstable because I only want a few things from the unstable branch, galeon, lastest mozilla, nautilus, and evolution.
Disclamer - Opinion of Person
When they say that a package has been removed from the distribution, does it mean we'll get the version of the program we had in Potato, or aren't we going to have it at all?
That's because there are no Linux drivers for the modem in my iBook 600 yet. But rest assured, when they come out or I get broadband, I'll be posting from Galeon in my already-working Debian PPC installation.
Geez, you're not any fun. You're supposed to explode in anger, righteously denouncing me for my gall and temerity in questioning the sexuality and basic intelligence of Mac users everywhere.
what exactly are trying to say? do you think i'm complaining about redhat? i'm stating a simple fact which i have no problem with:
redhat incremetns the major version when they break binary compatability
this is their method for incrementing major versions. i dont hate redhat, infact i really like them. calm down.
I actually had trouble with this in Potato over the weekend, and I found something interesting. While all the mirrors (that mirrored source packages as well) had the pine source in there archives, the package listing did not list it. I don't really know why this would happen, but I checked around and found a mirror that had it listed and used that one.
I've figured out how debian gets its low rate of vulnerabilities; it's because they report the vulnerabilities for stable, but not for unstable or testing, which is what everyone's actually running. It's kind of cheating, if you ask me.
I like debian overall, because it's the easiest to maintain, but the system for keeping software even relatively up-to-date is completely broken. I mean, releasing woody without KDE 3 is absurd.
seriously, if you spend your entire life looking at pretty website based baby food - you'll never be a sys-admin and you'll never be the Debian target audience.
A sensible search on google answers all your questions and un-earths more besides. Debian isn't good because it makes life easy, Debian is good because it automates life.
It has stuff like kernel-package - fast becoming the three line method of compiling ten different flavours of kernel ALSA+XFS+PREEMPT or any combination.
It has stuff like APT, which however much catching up other distributions have done, now adds preferences for intelligent sys-admins to automagically manage their installation from an infinite number of sources.
My point is, you may be right - but Debian has an agenda outside of what you want and is more interested in being cool than telling you it is.
lalala. modesty, sleeves. lalala.
I just changed my /etc/apt/sources.list so that it points to testing in stead of stable (woody in sted of potato). After that I did apt-get update && apt-get upgrade. After that I looked at the list of packages, pine4-src (or whatever the name is) isn't there.
4. Insert Windows XP CD
5. Install effortlessly
Ha, I wish. I'll admit, Windows XP is a great leap for MS, it's acutally a decent OS, but you go a little far saying that. I recently upgraded my parent's computer from 98SE to XP, and it hung at the step of determining system compatibility for over 6 hours. The machine was only about 3-4 years old, which I think is a reasonable age to expect a current OS on. That same weekend I installed Debian on an 8 year old box with no problems.
I see it in unstable and testing. (albiet in non-free, of course)
dburrows@auric:~$ madison pine
pine | 4.44-3 | testing | source
pine | 4.44-3 | unstable | source
You do realize that this is different from the "pine-src" package, right?
Daniel
Hurry up and jump on the individualist bandwagon!
After that I looked at the list of packages, pine4-src (or whatever the name is) isn't there.
That's because it's a source package, not a binary package. Type "apt-get source pine" and you can download it (assuming you have deb-src lines in sources.list)
Daniel
Hurry up and jump on the individualist bandwagon!
All of this talk about woody finally getting released is giving me a ...well, you know the punchline!
Can't wait though!
Why, if he's not careful, he might--gasp--delete his home directory, and MAYBE several temporary files! The system will keep on running without even noticing this event ;)
It only takes one to net install Debian.
A Linux luser settling for less again, who would have thought? Just install OS X, it actually fucking works.
Yeah, but pretty damn slowly, and besides, I enjoy tinkering with Linux. It gives me something to do when otherwise I'd be staring blankly at a computer screen. (As for exploding at someone who dared to question the intelligence of Mac users, well, my karma is low enough already :)
- Where
is Debby now?
- Are Debby and Ian still together?
- What does
Debby look like (jpg, if possible).
- Does Debby do Linux or is she
really a Windows gal?
- Where was Debby from originally (town, high
school, etc)?
I'd sort of like to start a Debby fan club for this unsung heroine of Free Software.Hey Debby, wherever you are -- we love ya, baby!
If you use the 2.4 boot floppies then the default kernel is 2.4 :)
whaaa whaaa whaaa...god...i've never seen such a bunch of friggin' crybabies. slash used to be a cool site where people said things FOR distros and not this whining bullshit. poor taco, poor debian, you freakin' morons. wake up and smell the fact that you've been downloading FREE SHIT you CYBER MONKEYS. get a clue. if you don't like something goddammit, change it yourself. HELP debian you bunch of whining sods...don't sit here and bitch about 'whaa..the installer's still old...blah blah blah'. you don't sound l33t or anything at all. you want features? help the team. otherwise, SHUT THE HELL UP and MAKE YOUR OWN DISTRO. christ, there's like how many out there?
and, if you can stop crying for a minute, check out CRUX, Gentoo, and Sorcery. they're ALL cool...YES THEY ARE...download them...they're a lot smaller in size and do the SAME THING. STOP BEING FRIGGIN' LAZY TOO.
you want cutting edge? you want brand new? HELLOOOOO....WTF is CVS for you pansies...
christ...
bye
Mmm hmm... I grant that I could have been more diligent here. I guess I'm just used to every other major distribution not needing a manual for their install -- self explanatory, complete, and all that. But yes, I needed to RTFM here.
Very good point. My primary focus was on the netinstall images for precisely this reason.
Yes, by all means, type in "ReiserFS" into that search box. Please tell me how many documents I must go through in order to find relevent info. But I digress, my main complaint was the fact that Debian's installer is about three or four years behind Caldera, RedHat, SuSe, Mandrake, etc.
I finally finished getting through the network install (writing this with a Mozilla nightly on Woody) and I must say it was one of the most painful experiences I have had with Linux in years. My god, setting up BIND with a few domains was easier than that and that is by no means a compliment.
Nice. If it actually gets through the install without crashing, no matter how likely you are to meet a minotaur during the process, it ain't considered broke.
Much akin to telling a Linux newbie that they're stupid for not knowing to type "ls" at the bash prompt or why the current directory isn't in the default execution path. Wake up! Before you mentioned it, I had no idea what the Progeny installer was or where to find it or that I should have been looking for it in the first place. The reason you know this is because you use Debian, are familiar with Debian and its satellite distributions, and have known it for long enough that you forget that others don't know it yet.
While you're at it, why not go yell at some 5th graders because they don't know how to solve Algebra problems yet. After all, since you know Algebra, they should be expected to know it too.
Good point. Although I think Debian would be better off having this Progeny installer worked on. The best installer is one that doesn't require documentation to use in the simplest case. Note: I am NOT saying that documentation isn't important. What I was looking for what something akin to RedHat's "Workstation" or "Server" install. Hell, I would have settled for something as easy as the "Custom" install. But in the end you're right. I should put my code where my mouth is and help out.
- I don't need to go outside, my CRT tan'll do me just fine.
At the time? No. I had to install it first. Hi chicken! Meet my good friend, Egg.
- I don't need to go outside, my CRT tan'll do me just fine.
I am a homosexual. I bought an Apple computer because of its well earned reputation for being "the" gay computer. Since I have become an Apple owner, I have been exposed to a whole new world of gay friends. It is really a pleasure to meet and compute with other homos such as myself. I plan on using my new Apple computer as a way to entice and recruit young schoolboys into the homosexual lifestyle; it would be so helpful if Steve "Blow" Jobs could produce more software which would appeal to young boys.
.... of the potatoe powered web server?
This poster's point about journalling hits home. While I have applied the ext3/UDMA patch and recompiled the kernel, I really think that Woody should install a journalling-capable kernel by default. The user should not have to get around compiling his own kernel or installing a non-default kernel to benefit from journalling. Instead, a menu should allow selecting which fstype will be used to create the filesystems for the install.
It doesn't stop there, though. Other things that make me think Woody could, once again, make Debian look as the forever obsolete distro and prevent it, once again, from achieving recognition outside the developpers' universe are:
Rationale: support for too many cards broken in 4.0 and 4.1, but restored in 4.2
This is actually a catch-22, as most architectures just being added to Debian will start at (currently) 2.4.17
Honnestly, defaulting to the above is a must. The funny thing is, most of the above is already possible on Woody. Why not base the default install on them?
Software is not supposed to be about how to work around a useability issue. - Ken Barber
www.gentoo.org
Noticing Ximian's recent snafu with the Red Hat 7.3 beta, I wonder if they have learned their lesson and have been practicing safe Woody lately. I really don't feel like seeing my whole Ximian Desktop setup breaking again, just because Ximian developpers are not in sync with Debian development and prepared to release Woody builds overnight, the day Woody hits the stable branch.
On a related issue, will Evolution be built and released by the Debian people themselves, so that it can be available for more than just i386? That package really rocks and could make a Linux desktop not only a viable choice, but a mightily attractive one, for business people. Unfortunately, given Ximian's current attitude of not wanting to release Woody builds until Woody hits stable, supporting it is currently a daunting task, whenever someone offers Linux consulting services based on Debian and would not recommend Potato to any customer because of obsolesence issues...
Software is not supposed to be about how to work around a useability issue. - Ken Barber
If you are interested in trying Debian out, but are afraid of installing it, then try out PGI, the graphical autohardware detection Debian installer. Make sure to check out the screenshots.
In my opinion, once the default Debian installer becomes idiot-proof, Debian will take over as the lead Linux distro.
I don't know about you, but losing my home directory would be irritating. On a single person desktop machine, who cares about the rest of the system?
None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
3-4 years old? Reasonable age? According to Moore's Law, this box is _antique_, gato! ;-)
As somebody who has just spent all weekend installing Debian for the first time (after years of RedHat indulgence) I'd say it's not for newbies. None of this hand-holdy GUI installs or userfriendly tools (dselect is a shining example of how to make things unnecessarily hard). If yuo want things to just work then debian isn't for yuo.
That said if yuo are willing to put in the time then debian is worth it. While stable is about a year out of date, testing is a lot more recent than RH 7.2 and it's relatively easy to get reasonably upto date libraries for compiling yuor own. And compiling yuor own is an option (which is where RH seems to go out of it's way to make things difficult). Adding "--PREFIX=/usr/local" really isn't that hard.
Nerd: Derogatory term typically directed at anybody with a lower Slashdot ID than you.
portinstall in FreeBSD is getting some of that now, but still needs some refining (such as listing all the choices before asking you one by one whether or not to install them
Still, dselect wasn't enough to keep me with debian. Between the politics and the age of the packages, I got fed up. Now there is the "testing" distribution, but there used to be no middle ground between a hopelessly out of date stable and the unstable distro that you could count on knocking out your system about twice a year.
hawk, happily with FreeBSD for the last few years, but still using debian on smaller older systems
Branden, without you, Debian would be nowhere, and everyone knows that. We already thank you for everything you have done!
Having to fetch XFree86 4.2.0 out of the new testing after Woody's release (*when* it's ready) is a small price to pay for this impending best Debian release of all times.
echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:" net@madduck
KDE3 Deb's ARE out....unoffcially..... tweakers.net/showtopic.php/" +
check:
"http://gathering
"467462/1/25"
(Yes, this is dutch..but it's not all that difficult to see the links....*ahem* *try right in front of you...the blue thingies..*)
// damn slashdot not being able to handel long url's...hmm paste 'em together..