Mandrake Linux 9.0 Beta 1

leviramsey writes "MandrakeSoft has released the first beta of the next version of its distribution. It features XFree86 4.2, KDE 3.0, GNOME 2.0, and is compiled with gcc-3.1, which (alas) makes it incompatible with a fair amount of commercial software."

Comments

Compiled with gcc-3.1

[rnturn]

Well, someone had to be first to ship with this compiler. I wouldn't worry. Vendors will catch up.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

gentoo has had gcc3.1 support for a while, now almost official with its 1.3 release

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Clue4All]

They're actually using GCC 3.1.1 from CVS now and will include the official 3.1.1 in 9.0. I wouldn't worry to much about vendors, either.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[FU_Fish]

I agree, if somebody doesn't step up and start using 3.x, we'll probably all be stuck 2.9x forever. Thank you Mandrake (and Gentoo).

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

That's great, but gcc-3.1 totally break's Kai's PhotoSoap, which I use every day in my job as graphic designer. Sorry, I love Mandrake, but I'm not going to upgrade until they squish that GCC bug.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[MCZapf]

Red Hat's current beta also uses gcc 3.1, right? If so, that's another big distro on top of things - and one vendors tend to single out anyway.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[BrookHarty]

Been using GCC 3.1 on my 7.3 SuSE Sparc install (sunblade 100) for months. They had the RPMS out for awhile, just upgrade and go, it even compiles the kernel. Very nice, alot of compile problems have went away with GCC 3.1.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[(startx)]

not to nit pick, but gcc-3.0 was in contrib/ in slackware 8, and 3.1 was in extra/ in 8.1

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Sunrun]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't MacOS X 10.2 also shipping with gcc-3.1, and wasn't that before today?

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[fmaxwell]

Well, someone had to be first to ship with this compiler. I wouldn't worry. Vendors will catch up.

I'm not worried about vendors catching up. I'm more concerned about users. Until Linux gets out of the habit of breaking huge numbers of apps with releases, Microsoft will continue to own the OS market. Recompiling and distributing apps costs money. Users don't expect to have to pay for new apps just because they upgraded from Mandrake 8.2 to Mandrake 9.0. So vendors either eat the costs or piss off the customer base.

Microsoft has a much better understanding of "the real world" than does the Linux community. Microsoft, love it or hate it, understands that you can't expect vendors to support your product and customers to buy it if you regularly break their software with OS upgrades. And this is coming from someone who really wants to see Linux succeed. I find the security bugs, Product Activation, constantly tightening EULA, Gestapo-like software audits, and Digital Rights Management to be a threat to the entire computer industry.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[dvdeug]

Actually, no one should be shipping with this compiler. The distributers on the GCC list - FreeBSD, Redhat, Debian and Suse, and I thought Mandrake was in on this - agree that some emergency bugfixes would be made to the C++ ABI, so it will be compatible with the 3.3+ C++ ABI, and this would be release as 3.2 (as there's an ABI change.) Apple was the only exception I knew of - they're going ahead with a release based on 3.1.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[hawwy]

Well, someone had to be first to ship with this compiler. I wouldn't worry. Vendors will catch up.

no way. when i downloaded mandrake 8.0 it came with version 2.95 i believe of gcc, and it made a ton of stuff really hard to install. so much that i went with slackware. i got mandrake becasue even though i'm a little linux saavy, i wanted a trouble-free, easy-to-use solution that would stand up on its own. it's not what i got, and the gcc shipped with 8 got them quite a bit of flak. don't see why they'd do it again.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[BeeShoo]

I don't know if it's going to include gcc 3.1 or not, but Mac OS X 10.2 isn't shipping until September.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

Does this sound familiar to you? Something tells you to look at the clock and it's 11:11. This has happened to me a lot of times in the past 6 months. In fact, so many times that I started wondering about it. It happens mostly with digital clocks, but sometimes you see it on receipts etc. I decided to do a google search of "11:11" and found out that a lot of people are experiencing the same. I do not believe in any paranormal and I'd certainly like to hear if someone's got a reasonable explanation for this. Well, do you?

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, no one should be shipping with this compiler. The distributers on the GCC list - FreeBSD, Redhat, Debian and Suse, and I thought Mandrake was in on this - agree that some emergency bugfixes would be made to the C++ ABI, so it will be compatible with the 3.3+ C++ ABI, and this would be release as 3.2 (as there's an ABI change.)

I'm sure Mandrake will follow along with this, simply because it makes it easier to port commercial stuff, etc. But I don't remember seeing any comments from Mandrake at the time of the discussion. Possibly I'm forgetting, though. AFAIK Mandrake doesn't support any GCC developers, so it was possible all that was heard from them about it was a quiet "Us too" back when it was up for debate whether or not to follow this course of action.

I don't think it's a hugely big deal - most of the ABI fixes 3.1->3.2 I've seen mention of are for relatively obscure things like a pointer to member when the class has the an overloaded delete[] operator but uses the default for the non-array delete, etc.

As a response to some other posts in this thread: 3.2 mainline passes the complete Intel ABI checks now. So, given that the ABI standard doesn't change (it would basically require a new version of ISO C++ to change it), 3.2 will be compatible with any future GCC releases, and also compilers from Intel and other vendors.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

First world war ended on 11th minute of eleventh day of eleventh month.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[TurdFurgeson]

Agreed.

Many here will make fun of "Compatibility Mode", a nice feature lacking in this new release.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Amazing Quantum Man]

Microsoft, love it or hate it, understands that you can't expect vendors to support your product and customers to buy it if you regularly break their software with OS upgrades

You mean like how they silently broke plugin compatibility with IE5.5SP2?

Former Mandrake 8.2 user. Current Mandrake 8.1 user.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

While you're contrasting with Microsoft, let me point out another thing: no one is forcing anyone to upgrade.

There are still Linux 2.0.x libc5 boxen in commission, chugging along, doing what they do best. There are systems based on really ancient gccs and egcs versions out there. And no one is complaining.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[TheWanderingHermit]

I don't know. Whenever I look at my clock, it's not 11:11, but 11:38. It happens almost every day, so I was thinking of just making a label "THX" and sticking it up before the 1138....

(Gee, I hope that doesn't mean I'll end up wearing a white jumpsuit, shaving my head, and living underground.)

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[rhaig]

I'm curious what this "habit" is that you speak of.

The only release issues that I know of that break some apps is releases that switch from gcc 2.95 to 2.96 or 3.x. Once does not make a habit. And these instances don't affect ALL apps.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Captain Pedantic]

I wonder how many self proclaimed geeks here know what the hell you are talking about?

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[fcrozat]

Mandrake 9.0 will be shipped with gcc 3.2..

We are currently using gcc 3.1.1 branch + backport from 3.2 branch and we will switch to gcc 3.2 as soon as it is released (either this week or next week)..

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[FFNieko]

Sure do, it's called coincidence. I've got the same thing with the number 243 (3^5). I see it everywhere, but that's just because my brain kind of is on watch for that number, all other numbers are just filtered away from your mind, because you'd go crazy if you noticed ALL numbers.

Or it's just because you've set your alarm to 11:11 :)

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Micah]

well Red Hat ships "compat-libs" and "compat-gcc" for its previous series. That means all apps compiled for Red Hat 7.x should work on 8.x as well. Might need upgrading at 9.0, but that's a couple years away....

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow. I have experienced this too. The first time I really noticed this was about a year ago.

I have also noticed the same thing for 1:11, 9:12, 2:56, 5:12, and 10:24. (Although the latter three happen to be favorite numbers of mine...)

But...

If you look at the clock at any given second, there is %0.14 chance you will see 11:11, assuming you're in a country where they use 12-hour clocks. Multiply that by however many times you look at the clock in a six month period.

This doesn't take into account when you're going to be awake, and when you're going to be around clocks. If you're often up late or at around noon, you're going to see 11:11 more than if you sleep early and/or sleep late. If your lunch hour starts at 11:30, and you start checking the clock when you're hungry, you might also see 11:11 more often.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe they should fix their broken code.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

THX1138 was the first feature film made by Star Wars diector George Lucas.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[abroadst]

Mac OS X 10.2 is in beta right now. Mandrake 9 is just now announcing beta. So 10.2 was first. (If it includes gcc 3.x which I frankly don't know.) Neither one is released, but I'd guess Apple will release first since they're already taking orders.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

Just curious...
What was it about 8.2 that you didn't like? I run it on a Tecra 8100 and love it.

Former Mandrake 8.2 user. Current Mandrake 8.1 user.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[CentrX]

gcc 2.95 is the standard that everyone has been using for a long time, so that version wouldn't be a problem. You probably mean gcc "2.96" that Mandrake released to be compatible with Red Hat.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Enonu]

No, I actually think he means like how DOS games got even better support in Windows XP than in Windows 2K. Or how there's a compatability mode selection for any app you want to run. It's quite nice.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

Um... 2.95.x is currently the "safe" gcc to use.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[cow ninja]

True, I still have a Redhat 4.0 (colgate) server running serving apache on my intranet.

I have no reason to update it.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[bubkus_jones]

1138 also has some small cameo in every movie he has made since.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

And the second named THX1138
The version he made as a school project was quite wonderful. The feature included just about every tunnel in the SF bay area. His films have been in a steady decline since then if you ask me.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[JonOnSlashdot]

i see the number 4:20 alot...

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

Weird. There was a lot of talk about it when I did a Google search. Why 11:11, why not 12:12, 13:13, 14:14? Some of the stuff found on the internet is clearly bullshit, but so many people are seeing this that it really feels weird. BTW, did you know that FreeBSD 5.0 will be released in 11.11 (eleventh day of november) this year?!

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[jefe289]

What about kernel upgrades?

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Compenguin]

Yes but MacOS X 10.2 isn't an option for manypeople because they don't ship X11 and it is non-free.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Compenguin]

The issue isn't apps as much as plugins, because the ABI isn't frozen. Mozilla compiled with gcc3.1 expects to communicat with a plugin in a certain format however gcc2.x uses a different naming scheme.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[dadragon]

You could just use Darwin, which IS free and DOES come with X11.

Darwin is pretty good, but it has its problems. Hopefully they're fixed now, I haven't used pure Darwin in a while.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[mickwd]

Great news. Thanks.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[reverius]

Gentoo has had GCC-3.1 as standard compiler in it's 1.3 beta.

This has been out since:

1.3a_test/ 28-Jun-2002 04:33 -

June 28, 2002... almost a month ago ;)

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought I was simply focusing in on the distinct pattern of 11:11, of but over time the statistical probability of the number of times I witnessed this phenomenon led me to question a little deeper.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[dadragon]

I have no reason to update it.

Except maybe, that older Apache installations have bugs. The rest of your system should be good though, as long as you have recent versions of other network apps like OpenSSH on them too.

You don't need to update your OS to run the newest Apache, just #./configure && make && make install.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[perler]

Microsoft, love it or hate it, understands that you can't expect [...]customers to buy it if you regularly break their software with OS upgrades

right, they expect from you to buy new products before they become obsolete by a) ending the support or b) let you buy a "software insurance" even before a) to get the next update to a reasonable ;) price before a) finally kicks in... very sensible.. :))

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[nelsonal]

I'm curious, why are you running linux on a Sun Blade? Is there an advantage over Solaris? Aren't both 8 and 9 zero cost for that system? I can understand someone using it on a PC or an older workstation just to learn the intracacies of Linux but the Blade 100s seemed like their only advantage was their ability to run Solaris.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[rhaig]

I haven't had any experience with kernel upgrades breaking commercial apps other than VMWare.

Software shouldn't be written at such a low level that a kernel upgrade will break it. VMWare broke because their kernel module broke. Most Commercial software shouldn't require a kernel module to run, but vmware of course is such low-level that I can see why it would require one.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

SuSE on a Blade 100? What a waste. Here, I'll trade my PentiumIII-800 for it. It has shiney things, just like SuSE does.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[SuperDuperMan]

Mandrake 8.2 could not run Opera from earlier versions of Linux because of a library incompatibility.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

Why does my clock keep showing 11:11? It has been established that many people all over the world are seeing odd patterns of numbers in their lives. I, for one, am no stranger to 11:11 and all its friends. Some say it's a sign from afar, a sign to sit up and take notice. Do a google search for "11:11". You'll be amazed, but be open minded. There are ones who are trying to make money out of this and there are some bullshit stories.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

missing libpng2

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

Consider this: 111,111,111 x 111, 111, 111 = 12,345,678,987,654,321. It's like a pyramid!

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Amazing Quantum Man]

Had problems with the UDMA5 mode, the nVidia drivers (yes, I know that one's not MDK's fault), and other minor little annoyances.

Also, I wasn't happy that I had to do the install four times before I realized that selecting tcpdump in the get updates portion was a big mistake, causing a hang (It wanted libpcap off CD 1, but wouldn't prompt for the CD).

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[DemENtoR]

Well redhats latest test distro called "Limbo" it's been out i think like 2 or 3 weeks, already has Gcc(3.1) and gnome2, and kde3.0.2, and all that stuff. So mandrake isn't the first "major" distro to ship with it. I wonder when debian will ship with gcc3.x?

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[tigger]

now linux maynot be better but don't be thinking microsoft is shiny - if it was i wouldn't need to have these four lines to get my program working correctly:
#ifndef _DEBUG
if (GetVersion() < 0x80000000)
tmp->tm_hour ++;
#endif
besides my understanding is that the ABI has only changed because they oppsied and found it wasn't able to handle some new/bezar C++ functions, hence old c apps are unaffected - but i must confess theres more guesswork than fact in that statement.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[nathanh]

I'm not worried about vendors catching up. I'm more concerned about users. Until Linux gets out of the habit of breaking huge numbers of apps with releases, Microsoft will continue to own the OS market.

Do you think Microsoft does any differently? I have Win2k apps that won't run on WinNT, WinNT apps that won't run on Win2k, nothing worked on WinXP, and don't get me going about all the applications I bought for Win95 (mostly games) where WINE is my only hope of ever using them again.

If applications support Win95, WinNT, Win2k, WinME and WinXP out of the box it's only because the vendors went through trials that would have made Heracles cringe.

If anything, I'm more impressed by the Linux camp because Linus refuses to change for changes sake and the libc guys are positively anal about backwards compatibility.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

umm.. because Linux runs FAST on ultrasparcs.. and he may be more comfortable with Mandrake Linux

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but I bet mandrake ships final before redhat does. I've tried them both and they are both excellent versions.

Things just keep getting better and better.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[fmaxwell]

Do you think Microsoft does any differently?

No, I know that they do things differently.

I have Win2k apps that won't run on WinNT, WinNT apps that won't run on Win2k, nothing worked on WinXP, and don't get me going about all the applications I bought for Win95 (mostly games) where WINE is my only hope of ever using them again.

I have, literally, hundreds of apps and am constantly amazed by the way that Microsoft gets them to work as they move from OS to OS. Sure, if you have an app from 1995 that defrags a FAT16 disk, yes, it won't work on an NTFS disk under Windows XP. But if you have a "normal" application, more often than not, it will run.

If applications support Win95, WinNT, Win2k, WinME and WinXP out of the box it's only because the vendors went through trials that would have made Heracles cringe.

Complete bunk. I have apps that were written for Windows 95 that still work fine in XP. How would a vendor that went out of business in 1997 have made hurculean efforts to make the app run in OSs that weren't even released yet? Why is it that Office 97 still works fine for people that now run 98, 98SE, Me, 2000, and XP?

If anything, I'm more impressed by the Linux camp

That's obvious. You are such an apologist for Linux that you wouldn't complain if Redhat included a fresh dog turd in every box.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Yottabyte84]

It's also available with Mandrake 8.2 but not installed by default.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Yottabyte84]

47.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Junior Macintosh]

X11 on Mac OS X is a not an issue. You can find X11 for Mac OS X here. Any halfway competent *NIX user can find and install it without any problems. Or you could install fink and just apt-get install it.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

Correct, but the 3.1 gcc OS X compiler that will be included in the Jaguar developer tools is available from CVS now.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[ceejayoz]

Congratulations on a post that proves you haven't used any of the Windows OS'es you claim to have worked with.

Out of all the apps I have installed, only two - TWO - failed to work under WinXP. One is Adaptec's CD burning software, the second is the game Ground Control. All others work fine. They all worked fine under Win98 and Win2000.

If applications support Win95, WinNT, Win2k, WinME and WinXP out of the box it's only because the vendors went through trials that would have made Heracles (sic) cringe.

It's called quality assurance, dolt. Plus the fact that MS seems to have worked pretty hard to ensure backwards compatibility (the new compatibility feature in Win2000/WinXP is very useful).

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[sn0wflake]

"Is your browser retarded [attbi.com]?"

LOL - One line of HTML is enough to crash MSIE 6.0. A visual bug is described at http://www.alistapart.com/bugs.html and security holes are described at http://www.pivx.com/larholm/unpatched/

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

And linux is free too! (-;
And linux on sparc, means most linux source compiles. Isnt that the coolest thing.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[deceptakahn]

I do the same thing with 2^10 == 1024.

Our brains filter out an inredible amount of information - my guess is that when you conciously notice something like this your brain's filter "tags" it, so you notice it more often.

this got really weird when I moved to dallas from austin - my new address is 1024 san jacinto.

This also happenes to me all the time with a new store or restaurant. I wont "see" that theres' one in my neighborhood until a friend has mentioned how much they love or hate it - soon enough they are everywhere.

An even better example is cars - once you really like/or and are thinking about buying/etc a particular automobile... POOF! everywhere. I've been seeing an overwhealming number of green honda accords since i bought mine in 1997.
(i know which one is mine at the mall, BTW, because i have a decepticon logo above the third brake light ;)

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[leviramsey]

Mandrake Cooker (sort of the equivalent of Debian Woody or Sid) has used gcc-3.1 as its sytem compiler since May 6.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

What's this ? Check out the failed photo.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

My first encounter of 11:11 was in college in 1978. Several of us had gathered in a dorm room, making use of a particular substance. As one indivudual completed his partaking, he looked at the clock and made note of the 11:11. It was decided on the spot to label said hour as "MAX HOUR" due to the state of being of all participants in the room at the time. Even to this day, we still refer to 11:11 as MAX HOUR.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[BiggyP]

chances are it wont "include" any compiler, since most mazc users have little/absoloutely no use for one, more likely the developers pack for it will include GCC, i seem to recall reading that some company was working on GCC optimisations for Altivec on G4.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Sleepy]

>Out of all the apps I have installed, only two - TWO - failed to work under WinXP. One is Adaptec's CD burning software, the second is the game Ground Control. All others work fine. They all worked fine under Win98 and Win2000.

You obviously have not used one long enough to experience this mythical "incompatability" the NT kernel has with many games. Congratulations on your first computer, noob. :-)

As a side note, unnecessarily being an snippy little smart ass -- as you were to your parent post -- just makes you look like an asshole.

Perhaps someday you'd like to install a "classic" game called Warcraft, which does not run under Windows 2000. When you're done, try Terminus (not that old either), Carmageddon, Return To Zork, SeaWolf, and Descent. This is all I can think of at the moment but there are MANY more examples. Of course, you can AGAIN purchase Warcraft (BNE edition) and it will run under Win2k, but that just supports the posters assertion that you have to re-buy a product under Windows.

>It's called quality assurance, dolt.

Afraid the only 'dolt' here is you. I hear all of your co-workers hate you because you're a know-it-all-prick. Oh and BTW your woman is cheating on you.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[mrogers]

You mean like how they silently broke plugin compatibility with IE5.5SP2?

They didn't silently break anything - there's a warning on the download page.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Amazing Quantum Man]

Yeah, but how many people got it from that page as opposed to though Windows Update(tm)?

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

No. It's apps too. A gcc3.1-compiled app needs a gcc3.1 libstdc++, which you won't find on a system without gcc3.1. Likewise, an app compiled with 2.95 won't run on a system with only 3.1, because it needs libstdc++ from 2.95.

This applies to all C++ apps, and all C++ libraries.

You can of course have different versions of libraries, some compiled with 2.95, some with 3.1, and all will be merry. But it's a little more complicated than you would want.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[FU_Fish]

Agreed. I should have pointed that out in my comment...I think I may have in another comment branch.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[BanteringCTO]

I disagree. You seem to be operating under the assumption that Linux--and Mandrake in particular--has a significant user base on the desktop. That's just not the case. Now is exactly the right time for all Linux distributions to move quickly toward the best technology available. Those of us using Mandrake for server operations will either upgrade (and deal with the issues, it's par for the course, regardless of OS vendor) or wait a while until commercial support catches up. Those of us currently using Linux on the desktop are, for the most part, capable of handling this change because we aren't typical desktop users. What's really important is that we have the very best OS possible by the time Linux starts to achieve critical mass on the desktop. At that point, your comments will be more applicable to the situation.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Compenguin]

yes, a gcc3.1 program or library needs the gcc libstdc++ from gcc3.1 but mozilla needs plugins that match the libstdc++ it uses

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[nathanh]

No point feeding the troll but the "(sic)" after Heracles is misplaced. Learn your Greek mythology.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually the fact that linux does this is one of the reasons I like it.... And yes I do have a commercial application riding on this one.

It seems to me that microsoft's upgrades only break applications that come from microsofts direct competitors :)

I have to agree that the standard method of selling and distributing commercial software does not work well with linux.... Suiting the linux market to smaller more responsive developers.

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me explain. I want fast, I want robust, I want stable. I want works.... And I am prepared to do footwork to achieve this.

Glad to hear

[dciman]

I'm always glad to hear about a new release from Mandrake. Although I personally use Debian, Mandrake has always done an excellent job of promoting useability with their distro. Not to mention what is often the best hardware suport out of the box that I have seen. Granted it isa bit bloated unless you do the expert instal. But I think it is targeted at exactly the right market, and is an easy way for people with out lots of experience to get some of the newest goodies out there.

Re:Glad to hear

[linzeal]

It is by far the best distro I have ever used out of the box for a laptop for hardware compatibility.

Re:Glad to hear

[Skyshadow]

I use Red Hat personally (I know, boo, hiss), but I have used Mandrake and I believe it will eventually be far and away the best desktop distro.

It's true that the install is somewhat bloated, but then again it seems like most desktop OS's are -- they tack on a lot of functionality that you might need just in case, sometime down the road, you do need it. IMO, this isn't such a problem with incredibly large desktop hard drives being so inexpensive.

Besides that, though, Mandrake has always seemed to have the end user in mind -- they were the first with a nifty GUI update feature, they were the first to introduce some of the simple programs to update config files (what can I say, vi scares some people), etc. Hopefully, in the longer run, this sort of emphesis will pay off on the desktop.

Remember: Just because Linux sucks on the desktop right now doesn't mean that it always will. Linux is an evolutionary product, and as such should eventually adapt to fill all niches (although not necessarily in the same form).

Re:Glad to hear

[JamesGreenhalgh]

I dunno - try SuSE 8.0, it spotted everything on:

1: Dell desktop machine, with TNT2 card on PCI bus overriding crap on-board Mach64.

2: Home machine, built from spares. Twin cpu, onboard scsi, onboard IDE, megaraid, USB camera, voodoo3

3: Dell server, brand new percraid raid card, problematic e1000 based intel network ports (dual)

It 'just worked' on all of the above, and was childs play to get installed and configured.

I'm extremely impressed :)

Re:Glad to hear

[Anonymous Coward]

> I dunno - try SuSE 8.0, it spotted everything on:

Unfortunately while SuSE spotted my MS wireless mouse, and CD-Rom during install it wasn't able to set either one up correctly.

Re:Glad to hear

[Emrys]

No one ever notes this, but Mandrake isn't just for newbies. It's actually a very good distribution for experienced sysadmins. Yeah, I know the've made their big rep on the "user friendly" front, and most people assume that a distro can't cater to both newbies and sysadmins... I used to think that, and never cared about giving Mandrake a look.

Then I got tired enough of trying to find a distro that really was what I as a sysadmin wanted (after trying redhat, slackware, debian, and suse, which back then were the main options), so I went ahead and gave Mandrake a whirl. I was very pleasantly surprised. Not only have they made sure the experienced users can disable the GUI stuff and not have it break the distro, they actually do active development in the areas that sysadmins care about. And their cooker development area is full of lots of good action for the bleeding edge types, whether you care about the latest GNOME & KDE or just ncurses & xterms.

Not to be flamebait, but I found in a nutshell that they contained all the source-y and sensible goodness I expected to get from Debian's policies and package management (the meatspace components of it, not dpkg itself), without some of the stuff I didn't like (which will remain here unnamed to avoid a distro war).

Mandrake was good enough that when I switched years ago I was able to use it as a base to compile everything on my home box from scratch and go from there ("why?" because it was there). Now that Gentoo & others are around, I'm planning to check those out and probably move on, but at least time when I switch distros it won't be because the one(s) I'm leaving behind are inadequate for someone that wants lots of control over their system.

Re:Glad to hear

[brsmith4]

I have used both Mandrake 8.2 and SuSE 8.0 and I would have to say that Suse 8 is far superior. They came out at relatively the same time so you would expect them to be very similar. Nope. Mandrake 8.2 installed the ide-scsi module for my cd burner, but at the same time, slapped together some shitty version of Xcdroast thus killing my ability to burn CDs without reinstalling xcdroast myself. Suse 8, on the other hand, configured the burner (modprobe ide-scsi) and all of the software (xcdroast, koncd, gcombust) worked right after the install. Another thing: NVIDIA drivers. Mandrake 8.2 does not let you know that you are using the crappy open sourced NVIDIA drivers while Suse not only informs you of this, but will download them and install them for you correctly, configure X with GLX support, and get you going. The sound support, although supposedly the same thing, sucks on Mandrake as opposed to Suse. On suse, i could almost go without the commercial oss drivers (if it werent for the fact that i already owned the license). These are my trials and tribulations. Take them as you will as I know we all have different experiences.

Re:Glad to hear

[UVABlows]

It's true that the install is somewhat bloated

I see this quite a bit describing Mandrake's install. I'm honestly confused by it (no sarcasm). You can get a mandrake installation to fill up only about 95mb of a harddrive (mandrake claims 65mb but I've never seen it). When I installed redhat 7.3, I deselected every single package and got about 400mb of stuff installed. I'm not trying to make a dig at redhat, it's the only other distro I've installed recently. Is there something else that makes it bloated?

Re:Glad to hear

[deno]

Oh, quite a few people have noticed this in the meantime. One doesn't have to be a newbie to appreciate te confort, you know! .-)

Just for ilustration, take a look at the way how number of "apache advanced-extranet" servers is growing with >100%/year, in spite of the fact that "the web" as a whole practically stopped with the growth, and all will be clear. "Mandrakebizcases.com" is also worth a visit...

java

[dlb]

* Java support is broken. Reason: The currently available Java is not compiled with GCC 3.1 and therefore does not work with our packages.
What is so imperative about going to gcc 3.1 that you have to break java?

Re:java

[SomeOtherGuy]

Can't Java be compiled against 3.1?

Re:java

[Clue4All]

What's is so imperative about Java that you don't want to use the best version of GCC out there? (They're actually using 3.1.1 and will have the final release in 9.0)

Re:java

[dlb]

If it can, why didn't they compile java against 3.1 before they packaged it in?

Re:java

[Requiem]

Some of us program pretty heavily in the language.

Re:java

[spencerogden]

The most important difference is that 3.1 does a much better job at c++, which makes a huge difference in KDE

Re:java

[southpolesammy]

You still have two options -- get the powers-that-be to compile and release a VM with gcc-3.1 compatibility, or don't use Mandrake 9.0b1. It's the same situation that Windows users find themselves in all the time, but this time it happens in the Linux world and we wonder what the fix is....

Re:java

[JebusIsLord]

Yes, you can compile the Sun JRE from source provided you have a compiled copy of the JRE to fulfill it's circular dependency. Then it apparently works fine. This is what is unfortunately necessary with Gentoo 1.3+ right now. You are still hooped on flash support though.

Re:java

[HisMother]

Here they're talking about GNU Java, not about Sun's Linux JVM. Download that, and it works just fine.

Re:java

[the MaD HuNGaRIaN]

My browser (mozilla) isn't RETARDED....but that link in your post sure as hell is.

Re:java

[dlb]

Well, if you're not a java developer and arent heavily involved in java it shouldnt matter... oh and if you're not using Mandrake as your desktop and dont care about using the VM as part of your web browsing, it shouldn't matter either.

No reason, I guess.

Re:java

[nikal]

The important thing is the gcc3.1 is by far a better compiler than the other gcc releases.

* 3.1 has a much more complete STL implementation
* 3.1 enforces namespaces as they are supposed to be.
* 3.1 generates by far more optimized code.

Any one of those reasons is good enough for me to make the switch; I've been using 3.1 for a few months now.

Re:java

[extrasolar]

Who runs java apps, anyway?

Re:java

[FU_Fish]

Install the official JDK, I'm pretty sure that'll still work. I know for a fact that the IBM jdk for linux works w/ gcc 3.x.

What is so imperative about going to gcc 3.1 that you have to break java?

The fact that it has better c++ support, produces more highly optimized code, and everyone will be moved to it soon anyways. There's no good reason, IMHO, not to switch to gcc3.x....including java...and I'm a java developer by trade.

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

GCC affects a helluva lot more things in a distribution than Sun's Java package does.

Re:java

[Garion911]

Yep, I have compiled Java with 3.1 (using the 2.95 comipiled one first of course.)

You will need a patch to compile Java too, read here for directions:

http://hints.linuxfromscratch.org/hints/javafrom sc ratch.txt

Also, you CAN get flash to work, there's a post in gentoo's message boards on how to do this:

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=4753

Hope this helps.

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

The name of the object tag is "dosIE." I know you can do it, try to put 2 and 2 together. Come on, I have faith in you, think really hard...

Re:java

[Dave Yearke]

For some of the gory details on the GCC 3.1/Java/Mozilla incompatibilities, here's a link:

http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116444

Re:java

[stipe42]

It's the same situation that Windows users find themselves in all the time, but this time it happens in the Linux world and we wonder what the fix is....

Yeah those silly Linux users, conditioned to think that problems in the OS should be fixed. Next thing you know they'll think rebooting every two hours in unreasonable.
stipe42

Re:java

[SuperMediocre]

Those of us who are lucky enough to develop in Java...

Re:java

[Cyclops]

What is so imperative about supporting proprietary software? Specially from a third party?

If the java community really cared, they'd be pressing sun to make java GPL, instead of whining about the evolution of Free Software... Now... THAT would rock...

Re:java

[modulus]

What's so imperative about Java that you have to impede gcc 3.1?

Java is not so great.

Re:java

[Sanity]

If the java community really cared, they'd be pressing sun to make java GPL, instead of whining about the evolution of Free Software... Now... THAT would rock...

It is unlikely Sun will GPL their JVM implementation, if only because they are probably using third-party code here and there that they have no right to release as Open Source.

A much better solution is to use and support Kaffe, a free GPL'd Java runtime environment which as of late has been under very active development.

Re:java

[mosch]

nice link, jackass. FYI, moderators, the link is designed to crash IE.

Re:java

[illusion_2K]

I would tend to agree, although it is a very nice feature about current linux distros that there can always be one or two 'pushing the envelope' like this. Alas, I wouldn't be one of the people trying out Mandrake 9 anyway and lack of java support is just one of the many reasons.

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

I just get a blank page here, IE 6 on Win98SE. Maybe your browser is broken.

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

SuperMediocre ...lucky enough to develop in Java...

I rest my case.

Re:java

[Cyclops]

Those are good news that you gave, I thought that this project was almost dead!

Re:java

[WetCat]

Moreover it's Java problem, not Mandrake problem.
If Sun would like to push Java to Mandrake users, it should give source to Mandrake builders... which Sun doesn't want to do...

Re:java

[borgasm]

hmm...it seems my Mozilla browser it not retarded

but thanks anyways for asking

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

Almost nobody, unless you're counting those stupid little Java games on websites which most of us can do without.

There was only ONE Java app which I routinely used on Linux: Limewire. It was slow and unresponsive, like every other Java app I've used.

Java only has one redeeming feature in the eyes of the user: cross-platform portability. You don't have to worry if the app is available on your OS.

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

Who runs java apps, anyway?

Uhmmmm...yer mom.

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

So the language you use to develop something in is now based on luck? That's odd, I've always had free choice as to what language I use.

Re:java

[pmz]

Well, since I am actually a department store mannequin, I see some retarded browsers, who faithfully listen to salesmen, and some not-so-retarded browsers, who reflexively say "I'm just looking". Anyway, I'm glad that they put me near the PC sales rack, so I can post to Slashdot when no one is looking ;)

Re:java

[Bollie]

* Java support is broken. Reason: The currently available Java is not compiled with GCC 3.1 and therefore does not work with our packages.

What is so imperative about going to gcc 3.1 that you have to break java?

Not to harp too much, but I've got a shiny new Gentoo system compiled from scratch with GCC 3.1

1) GCC 3.1 makes bigger code
2) GCC 3.1 makes faster code (most of the times)
3) GCC 3.1 actually tries to conform to a standard other than "just GCC"
4) Binary compatability is ONLY broken for C++ (maybe some other languages, but definitely not C)
5) Java (Sun's JDK) works if you compile it from scratch.
6) Plugins with Mozilla is a bit tricky.
7) In order to maintain Red Hat compatability they HAVE to use GCC 3.1
8) The GCC team will shortly break binary compatability yet again (by renaming the GCC 3.1 branch to GCC 3.2).
9) My is fine. Maybe not stable, but much nicer for a desktop.
10) Once more people jump on the GCC 3-series bandwagon again (They jumped off when Red Hat did the gcc 2.96 doodoo) GCC will have a nice, stable ABI that won't be broken anytime soon.

Damn. Harped too much... oh well...

Re:java

[IamTheRealMike]

The most important difference is that 3.1 does a much better job at c++, which makes a huge difference in KDE

In theory yes, in practice unfortunately it seems that it doesn't. I saw some statistics for 3.1, it takes TWICE as long to compile, and the resulting binaries are slightly slower at linking. The reason KDE seems slow is due to start up time, caused by inefficient linking, so 3.1 doesn't seem to improve KDE at all. Apparently it now requires an improved glibc, but I may be wrong here.

Anybody care to correct me on this?

Re:java

[carlivar]

It's not his fault you use a retarded browser. He even warned you.

Carl

Re:java

[NullProg]

Tried you link, received this:

Sorry, links to Bugzilla from Slashdot are disabled.

Enjoy,

Re:java

[QueefChief]

Just because you don't agree with something doesn't make it retarded. Btw, retarded really means "slow", so by this, Mozilla on Linux is retarded (but not really retarded like it used to be).

Re:java

[QueefChief]

What's there to fix? The OS is not broken. Brokeness is not defined by you not getting every little feature that you want. Oh yeah, and this is beta.

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

Because proprietary software runs the world! Linux is either a player or it's a toy. Which is it? I maintain that it is and always will be a toy and as such your comment makes sense. But an awful lot of people want tot to be more. And this sort of thing is exactly what has to NOT happen.

Re:java

[swillden]

Still trying to get that first job, huh?

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

IE 6 on win2k crashed on me.

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe your browser is broken

Actually, I think it's because their browser is retarded.

Re:java

[mosch]

Actually, I use mozilla on freebsd, but I still don't think it's appropriate to purposefully crash people's web browsers. Grow up.

Re:java

[Enonu]

It's running as the backbone for multi-million dollar businesses doing E-commerce, it's probably the second largest used language under C/C++, and Java is still gaining in popularity.

Sounds pretty important to me. Breaking Java is akin to breaking something like X for some folks.

Re:java

[Progoth]

hint: try the link on IE

fun stuff to forward to coworkers in a windows-only shop...

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

So? What exactly is your point? This wasn't a dick size contest between gcc and java ya know.

Re:java

[BigBir3d]

If the current version of Java came out first, shouldn't it be Mandrake that should work with Java?

Re:java

[killmeplease]

Duh, no one is worried about compile time or link time as far as speed. Better compilers take longer and produce more machine code for faster running applications. Those speeds have nothing to do with speed of applications.

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

welll duh... it only affects broken or inferior web browsers!

Re:java

[mickwd]

Depends whether you're talking about the compile and link times (mainly significant for developers), or the speed of the resulting run-times (significant for EVERYBODY).

Also, your comments don't seem to tally with what it says on the official GCC 3.1 changes page.

Re:java

[DrXym]

Presumably Java requires a glibc compiled with the old compiler. In which case, I don't see why Mandrake couldn't ship one just to keep it happy.

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not the copy-protected AudioCD vendors' fault that the MacOS Cd player is retarded, either.

Ooooh. Ooooh. Let me pay some guy to use a fucking paperclip to get the CD out of my Mac. I'm a dumbshit Mac user.

heh.

Re:java

[SN74S181]

Forth programmers don't have 'jobs.'

What is this 'job' word anyway??

Re:java

[DGolden]

I somehow doubt Sun Java will ever be GPLed while a certain J. Gosling is still alive - read up on your Emacs history to find out why...

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, sure you do. Nice recovery, fucktard.

Re:java

[QueefChief]

So, let me get this straight, it's okay to make fun of other browsers (and I mean downright insult them and their users), but I try to promote a more civil environment and mention that mozilla is slow on linux (although not as slow as it used to be), just to highlight the fact that mozilla is not without its faults too, and I'm considered flamebait? What's the point of having an open discussion forum if the moderators are simply going to moderate biasedly? Yes, I know that this is an old topic, but why even have the forums then? So we can all pat ourselves on the back? It's clearly not to promote an open-minded discussion. Now, this post is probably flamebait, so mod accordingly.

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

His statement was that GCC should be held back from distribution because Java is broken. That's a dick size contest if I ever saw one.

Re:java

[Azar]

> I saw some statistics for 3.1, it takes TWICE as long to compile, and the resulting binaries are slightly slower at linking.

Firstly, why don't you site a source rather than, I saw this once somewhere... It's much more helpful in a discussion. According to the GCC 3.1 changelog "# The preprocessor is 10-50% faster than the preprocessor in GCC 3.0." The preprocessor is GCC 3.0 is known to be slower than the preprocessor in 2.95.3, so this doesn't mean that GCC 3.1 compiles faster than 2.95.3. However, code compiled with GCC 3.1 is is up to 8.2% faster than code compiled with GCC 3.0 and code compiled with GCC 3.0 is up to 2.1% faster than code compiled with GCC 2.95.3.

There are tradeoffs between runtime speed and compile time speed. The better, faster code optimizations you want, the longer it's going to take to compile. But how often do you compile the same program many times? I'd MUCH rather have slower compile times than slower program speed.

Programs compiled with GCC 3.1 can be up to 10.3% faster than programs compiled with GCC 2.95.3. That's just enough that you'll notice the difference (though it won't be huge). Plus, GCC 3.1 complies much more closely with the C++ ABI. This will improve even more so with GCC 3.2.

Remember, this is only a BETA! The final version is expected to have the GCC 3.2 compiler.

Cheers!

Re:java

[fobbman]

And you would upgrade one of these mission-critical servers with Mandrake 9.0 BETA.

Get a grip. This is a BETA a of a dot-zero release. Only WinME crashes more than a dot-zero release BETA.

Re:java

[Principal Skinner]

Please tell me where I can get the source for the Sun JRE.

Re:java

[dd301]

It is unlikely Sun will GPL their JVM implementation

More than likely they want to maintain control over the code. If they have a competing (complete)GPLed implementation, people might be tempted to use that instead.

Re:java

[autocracy]

It's his .sig - that's where it's your right to be an arse.

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

5) Java (Sun's JDK) works if you compile it from scratch.

pray tell how anyone who doesn't work for sun is supposed to accomplish that.

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

nevermind- i found the place to download the source. wow, didn't know they did that.

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

What, are you 12?

Re:java

[realdpk]

Should submit a bug to bugzilla about that, been that way for a while unfortunately.

Re:java

[fferreres]

Problem is you need to annoy just _1_ guy to get your post downgraded and labeled. Do not assume everyone thinks your post is flamebait just because it's modded as such.

But probably nobody will even read you post because _1_ guy didn't like it. Metamod needs to be timely (which is not) and focus on downgrades. Yes, a non-troll non-flamebait post downgraded is WORST than a false positive (overrated post).

Anyway, usually adding a "IHMO, blah blah" or "In my opinion, this that. Others will disagree" reminds moderator that's just an opinion. Not like you are stating the ABSOLUTE and only ONE truth about the subject.

Re:java

[IamTheRealMike]

Hiya,

Well I didn't cite because I saw these figures buried in one of the KDE mailing lists and didn't have the link handy. Also, you're right about runtime speed but I was talking about link speed (to do with startup time) which it doesn't appear to improve at all. Most people don't have a beef with the runtime speed of Linux apps (which is generally good), they don't like the amount of time C++ apps take to start.

Re:java

[QueefChief]

Well, I do realize that it was just one person that modded that way, but since I don't know who it was, I was posting to all would-be modders. But thanks for trying to explain it. Maybe I'll try to state the obvious a little more obviously by slapping in a "IMHO" in the future.

Re:java

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, this is from the same team of morons who have managed to break a simple apache update - their current "update" for Apache introduces bugs that were quashed in 1.3.11!!! I'd run away from Mandrake. Run fast, run far, but get away!

A Mandrake fan cries...

[mikehunt]

Just as I am about to go on holiday without a single computer in sight, Mandrake release a new beta.

How can they do this to me?!!!

Re:A Mandrake fan cries...

[ShavenYak]

Hey, don't worry about it. Thanks to the /. effect, you wouldn't be able to download it until you got back anyway.

Re:A Mandrake fan cries...

[shadow303]

You aren't missing much since the servers will likely be crippled by the slashdot effect anyway. Wait a little while, and the download should be a lot less painful.

Re:A Mandrake fan cries...

[Anonymous Coward]

please get a life. relaxing on a vacation away from work/computers/etc will help. thank you.

P

Re:A Mandrake fan cries...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not going to be a problem. No doubt, the /. effect will prevent you from downloading it until you get back anyway!!

Re:A Mandrake fan cries...

[Anonymous Coward]

maybe Club members could all put in their vacation schedules and the developers could plan releases around them?

Re:A Mandrake fan cries...

[mikehunt]

*Sigh of relief* Thanks! I'd forgotten about the
/. effect for a moment there!

I feel much better now.

Re:A Mandrake fan cries...

[mikehunt]

Ever seen a joke before?

Re:A Mandrake fan cries...

[packeteer]

i am reading this from my 4th day of my vacation to Maui... gotta have my slashies... good thing im staying with family where i am going to install the newest mandrake on a duel 733 ;) i love vacations but i cant relax without my KDE every now and then...

Which apps won't work with gcc-3.1?

[Archie Steel]

Is there a way to find out? I know it's still early, but I just want to find out if I should be excited about Mdk9.0 yet...

Re:Which apps won't work with gcc-3.1?

[nev]

Check out the Gentoo GCC3 forum. They have been playing with GCC 3 for a while now and the forum has good information on getting various programs to work with it. Problems seem to come up in two places:

• The compiler can't compile a program due to the source not being compatible with the new GCC.
• Commercial binaries are not compatible with libraries compiled with the new GCC. This affects things such as Mozilla plugins (Flash, Acrobat).

Re:Which apps won't work with gcc-3.1?

[TheTomcat]

# Commercial binaries are not compatible with libraries compiled with the new GCC.

Does this affect VMWare?

S

Re:Which apps won't work with gcc-3.1?

[greenrd]

Yes, in at least one respect. If you use gcc 3.x and vmware, you must compile your kernel and vmware with a recent gcc 2.9x, otherwise it won't work. Hopefully a later release of vmware will fix this issue.

vmware works fine for me under a (mostly) redhat rawhide system, which uses gcc 3.1 - but with a custom kernel I compiled myself with compat-gcc-2.96.

Re:Which apps won't work with gcc-3.1?

[leviramsey]

It's the K5 invasion of Slashdot!

Re:Which apps won't work with gcc-3.1?

[Anonymous Coward]

That just isn't true. I'm running gcc 3.1.1 and the latest version of VMWare (3.1.1 I think), and I compiled both the kernel AND the vmware modules with the newer gcc. Everything still works fine. And I don't have any development libraries for 2.9x installed.

Re:Which apps won't work with gcc-3.1?

[greenrd]

Ah. Well I'm not making this up. I'm not using gcc 3.1.1, so I think my problem was either caused by a bug in a slightly earlier version of gcc, or it was caused by compiling in the preemptible kernel patch with gcc 3.1.

Or maybe we have different processors (I have a PIII) and the bug in question only shows up on certain processors. It's theoretically possible though unlikely.

Wow, 9.0 so soon?

[colmore]

I feel like 8.x went by as I blinked.

they've really been churning them out lately.

Re:Wow, 9.0 so soon?

[Anonymous Coward]

The Mandrake CEO says "we plan to have a new release every 6 months".

Re:Wow, 9.0 so soon?

[Anonymous Coward]

this is insiteful?
wouldnt it be better if he said something ya know worthwhile?

Re:Wow, 9.0 so soon?

[Jacer]

Yes, Mandrake is making an effort to stay current, and doing a hell of a job with it too!

Re:Wow, 9.0 so soon?

[bcwengerter]

they've really been churning them out lately.

Meanwhile, at the Mandrake Linux News page:

March 18th, 2002 - Mandrake Linux 8.2 is available!

July 23rd, 2002 - Mandrake Linux 9.0 Beta 1 appears

A little over four months? Yeah, I'd say so. :-)

Re:Wow, 9.0 so soon?

[brsmith4]

Aren't you glad its not like debian? :o

Re:Wow, 9.0 so soon?

[Anonymous Cowrad]

I like that debian waits until they know something is stable before they release it.

Cutting edge is loads of fun, too, but sometimes I just need to get my work done.

More frequent releases != better software. I'll be sticking with my older, stable releases for now.

Re:Wow, 9.0 so soon?

[colmore]

I know it isn't as fast as it seems.

There was a time in my life when I could have (and would have) tried out every new release, I guess now, I'm busy with enough other things and only occasionally check in on releases that it seems to fly by.

Re:Wow, 9.0 so soon?

[SN74S181]

The most stable machine on my home network is my Teletype ASR-33. It's almost entirely metal and all electromechanical. It's a bit out of date but I can use it to log onto the Vax now that I have the termcap set up for it.

I like to stick with older, stable releases, too. I heard something recently about this thing called a 'glass teletype' where they use a TV monitor in a box. If I went to using something like that I could edit with vi and all the new tools. But I like my trusty line editor ex just fine for most purposes.

Fair amount of commercial software

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux has a fair amount of commercial software?

Where's the love?

[Storm Damage]

Mandrake puts out a beta, and it gets front-page coverage, but Debian Woody finally goes gold, and Rob isn't all over it? I know there was a Debian article last week and all, but I'd think that after almost 2 years this would be a significant cause for cheerleading and celebration!

Re:Where's the love?

[ajakk]

I bet you are one of these people who complain when duplicate stories are posted saying, "The least they could do is run a search on /." Amazingly, when I ran a search for "debian", the first thing I found was the announcement that Woody went gold. There were only 490 comments on the article.

Re:Where's the love?

[Cyph]

There was a story about it, check it out here.

Re:Where's the love?

[thonot]

Mandrake puts out a beta, and it gets front-page coverage, but Debian Woody finally goes gold, and Rob isn't all over it? I know there was a Debian article last week and all, but I'd think that after almost 2 years this would be a significant cause for cheerleading and celebration!


Well, if you had searched before asking that question, you would have found this at the top of the results, and it was on the front page.

Re:Where's the love?

[Guspaz]

Woody is outdated out of the box. KDE 2.2 instead of 3.02, Gnome 1.4 instead of 2.0 or whatever, XFree 4.1 instead of 4.2 or whatever... Woody doesn't seem to have ANY up-to-date software.

Regards, Guspaz.

Re:Where's the love?

[Storm Damage]

Well would you look at that...

Amazingly, I did check the archives...probably should have searched, but I skimmed through the older articles to make sure I hadn't missed it while I was looking for the Importance of Being Debian link...

Now I'm gonna run off to get my eyes checked and cut my belly.

(and I could have sworn I freshened up on the latest headlines Friday evening, too...weird)

Re:Where's the love?

[Gulthek]

Eh, it's not your fault. The search system for slashdot is...ahh, lacking to say the least. They should really just hire google to breathe new life into the article search.

Re:Where's the love?

[sirinek]

Go to the debian web site, learn SOMETHING about it (because its very clear you dont know the first thing about debian) and look at why woody has older versions of software.

Woody isnt out there trying to be the most current Linux distro, its designed to be and it *IS* the most stable Linux distro because it uses very well tested versions of software.

siri

Re:Where's the love?

[Anonymous Coward]

Debian Woody finally goes gold

Yeah! Debian makes the bold move to have their stable version only 3 years out-of-date, and nobody notices!

(Ehrm - Kde 2.2, Gnome 1.4, X 4.1?)

I thought I'd never see the day when Slackware shipped with "newer" software than Debian.

Re:Where's the love?

[Anonymous Coward]

I am using KDE 2.2 at home and KDE 3.0 at school.
The latter looks nicer but that is the only way
it improves on 2.2, so I don't see any reason to
rush it into the stable branch of Debian.
Experimental packages have been available for
quite some time and if you are such an eye candy
junky you can install them at your own risk.

Re:Where's the love?

[smcavoy]

Those packages were just recently released. Debian's focus is on stability, not the latest wiz-bang features. You could try "unstable" Which is on par with a x.0 release of mandrake or Redhat for stability.
Heck, why doesn't every just switch over to Apache 2.0 already??

Re:Where's the love?

[Klaruz]

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF -8&q=site%3Aslashdot.org

Re:Where's the love?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Woody is outdated out of the box. KDE 2.2 instead of 3.02, Gnome 1.4 instead of 2.0 or whatever, XFree 4.1 instead of 4.2 or whatever... Woody doesn't seem to have ANY up-to-date software.

Woody is the *stable* Debian distribution; no Debian stable release will ever have the Latest & Greatest, at least not for long after its initial debut.

What I believe you (and many others) want to use is the Debian *testing* distribution. That's where the more recent s/w will be, and that s/w will have gone through the Sid (unstable) distribution first, to ensure the more grevious bugs are shaken out before the s/w hits testing. Current testing distribution is named "Sarge". It's currently the same as Woody (forked from the Woody tree), but it will start advancing soon enough.

(And, for the inevitable question "WHY NOT?!?", the 11 supported architectures make large packages like XFree86, KDE and Gnome highly non-trivial to maintain and make ready when a new version comes out. There *are* unofficial sites that have the .debs for these. They'll get into the main archive stream (unstable -> testing) when they're deemed solid enough to not generate tons of bug reports. But no, they'll never be in the stable distro until the next major release.)

Re:Where's the love?

[Gulthek]

Sure any googler can do that, but it isn't integrated with the site.

Does it list articles by date? Can you search user comments only? Can you search by title only?

Re:Where's the love?

[ultrabot]

Woody isnt out there trying to be the most current Linux distro, its designed to be and it *IS* the most stable Linux distro because it uses very well tested versions of software.

Perhaps you are oversimplifying a little bit? Woody has 11 archs to support, and the Debian people keep mentioning about the shortcomings of the release process. Also, Debian has tons of packages. All these things contribute to somewhat outdated packages (according to some people).

Besides, I don't think Woody is outdated at all - certainly not as outdated as uninformed people seem to think it is.

Re:Where's the love?

[Guspaz]

Everybody I know who ever tried to install Woody, myself included (Tried three times) were faced with the same problem: Woody claimed there were errors unpacking the installation packages, and didn't end up installing most of them, just downloading them.

Now, if it had been just me, I'd have written it off as Woody not liking my hardware, which would have been strange since it's such standard hardware, but possible. But when it happens to everybody else too, this tells me the problems are with Woody, not with my machine.

Woody has been anything but stable for me. On the other hand, the SAME machine has no problems installing RedHat or Mandrake. Strange, no?

Regards, Guspaz.

ECI-ADSL

[Anonymous Coward]

despite all my ranting they haven't included the eci adsl It works great and supports loads of USB ADSL modems.

mirrors

[dotgod]

Australia

ftp://ftp.planetmirror.com/pub/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Brisbane)
Austria

ftp://ftp.univie.ac.at/systems/linux/Mandrake/8.2/ i586/ (Vienna)

ftp://gd.tuwien.ac.at/pub/linux/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Vienna)
Belgium

ftp://ftp.belnet.be/packages/mandrake/8.2/i586/
Costa Rica

ftp://ftp.ucr.ac.cr/pub/Unix/linux/mandrake/Mandra ke/8.2/i586/
Czech Republic

ftp://ftp.cesnet.cz/OS/Linux/Mandrake/mandrake/8.2 /i586/ (Brno)

ftp://ftp.fi.muni.cz/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Brno)

ftp://klobouk.fsv.cvut.cz/pub/linux-mandrake/Mandr ake/8.2/i586/ (Prague)

ftp://mandrake.redbox.cz/Mandrake/8.2/i586/

ftp://sunsite.mff.cuni.cz/OS/Linux/Dist/Mandrake/m andrake/8.2/i586/ (Prague)

http://ftp.fi.muni.cz/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Brno)
Denmark

ftp://ftp.dkuug.dk/pub/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Koebenhavn)

ftp://ftp.sunsite.dk/mirrors/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Aalborg)
Estonia

ftp://ftp.aso.ee/pub/os/Linux/distributions/mandra ke/8.2/i586/
Finland

ftp://ftp.song.fi/pub/linux/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Espoo)
France

ftp://ftp.ciril.fr/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Nancy)

ftp://ftp.club-internet.fr/pub/unix/linux/distribu tions/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Paris)

ftp://ftp.info.univ-angers.fr/pub/linux/distributi ons/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Angers)

ftp://ftp.lip6.fr/pub/linux/distributions/mandrake /8.2/i586/ (Paris)

ftp://ftp.proxad.net/pub/Distributions_Linux/Mandr ake/8.2/i586/ (Paris)

ftp://ftp.u-strasbg.fr/pub/linux/distributions/man drake/8.2/i586/ (Strasbourg)

ftp://linux.ups-tlse.fr/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Toulouse)
Germany

ftp://ftp-stud.fht-esslingen.de/pub/Mirrors/Mandra ke/8.2/i586/ (Esslingen)

ftp://ftp.de.uu.net/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/

ftp://ftp.fh-giessen.de/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i58 6/ (Giessen)

ftp://ftp.fh-wolfenbuettel.de/pub/os/linux/mandrak e/dist/8.2/i586/ (Wolfenbuettel)

ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Goettingen)

ftp://ftp.join.uni-muenster.de/pub/linux/distribut ions/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Muenster)

ftp://ftp.leo.org/pub/comp/os/unix/linux/Mandrake/ Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Munchen)

ftp://ftp.tu-chemnitz.de/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i5 86/ (Chemnitz)

ftp://ftp.tu-clausthal.de/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i 586/ (Clausthal)

ftp://ftp.uasw.edu/pub/os/linux/mandrake/dist/8.2/ i586/ (Wolfenbuettel)

ftp://ftp.uni-bayreuth.de/pub/linux/Mandrake/8.2/i 586/ (bayreuth)

ftp://ftp.uni-kassel.de/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i58 6/ (Kassel)

ftp://ftp.uni-mannheim.de/systems/linux/mandrake/8 .2/i586/ (Mannheim)

ftp://ftp.vat.tu-dresden.de/pub/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Dresden)

ftp://ramses.wh2.tu-dresden.de/pub/mirrors/mandrak e/8.2/i586/ (Dresden)

ftp://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/pub/Linux/ mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Aachen)
Greece

ftp://ftp.duth.gr/pub/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Thrace)

ftp://ftp.ntua.gr/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Athens)
Hong Kong

ftp://ftp.wisr.eie.polyu.edu.hk/linux/mandrake/8.2 /i586/
Hungary

ftp://ftp.linuxforum.hu/mirror/Mandrake/8.2/i586/
Ireland

ftp://ftp.esat.net/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/
Italy

ftp://bo.mirror.garr.it/mirrors/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Bologna)

ftp://ftp.edisontel.it/pub/Mandrake_Mirror/Mandrak e/8.2/i586/
Latvia

ftp://ftp.latnet.lv/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/
Netherlands

ftp://ftp.nl.uu.net/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/

ftp://ftp.nluug.nl/pub/os/Linux/distr/Mandrake/Man drake/8.2/i586/

ftp://ftp.surfnet.nl/pub/os/Linux/distr/Mandrake/M andrake/8.2/i586/

ftp://ftp.wau.nl/pub/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Wageningen)
Poland

ftp://ftp.ps.pl/mirrors/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Szczecin)

ftp://ftp.task.gda.pl/pub/linux/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Gdansk)
Portugal

ftp://ftp.dei.uc.pt/pub/linux/Mandrake/Mandrake/8. 2/i586/ (Coimbra)

ftp://tux.cprm.net/pub/Mandrake/8.2/i586/
Russia

ftp://ftp.chg.ru/pub/Linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Chernogolovka)
Singapore

ftp://ftp.singnet.com.sg/opensource/linux/Mandrake /8.2/i586/
Slovakia

ftp://spirit.profinet.sk/mirrors/Mandrake/8.2/i586 / (Bratislava)
Spain

ftp://ftp.cesga.es/pub/linux/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Galicia)

ftp://ftp.cica.es/pub/Linux/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Sevilla)

ftp://ftp.rediris.es/pub/linux/distributions/mandr ake/8.2/i586/
Sweden

ftp://ftp.chello.se/pub/Linux/Mandrake/8.2/i586/

ftp://ftp.chl.chalmers.se/pub/Linux/distributions/ Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Gothenburg)

ftp://ftp.du.se/pub/os/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Dalarma)
Switzerland

ftp://ftp.pcds.ch/pub/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Neuhausen)

ftp://sunsite.cnlab-switch.ch/mirror/mandrake/8.2/ i586/ (Zurich)
Taiwan

ftp://linux.cdpa.nsysu.edu.tw/pub/Mandrake/mandrak e/8.2/i586/

ftp://linux.csie.nctu.edu.tw/distributions/mandrak e/Mandrake/8.2/i586/

ftp://mdk.linux.org.tw/pub/mandrake/8.2/i586/
Turkey

ftp://ftp.ankara.edu.tr/pub/linux/dagitimlar/Mandr ake/8.2/i586/ (Ankara)
United Kingdom

ftp://ftp.mirror.ac.uk/sites/sunsite.uio.no/pub/un ix/Linux/Mandrake/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Canterbury)
United States

ftp://ftp-linux.cc.gatech.edu/pub/linux/distributi ons/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Georgia)

ftp://ftp.cise.ufl.edu/pub/mirrors/mandrake/Mandra ke/8.2/i586/ (Florida)

ftp://ftp.cse.buffalo.edu/pub/Linux/Mandrake/mandr ake/8.2/i586/ (NY)

ftp://ftp.nmt.edu/pub/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (New Mexico)

ftp://ftp.orst.edu/pub/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Oregon)

ftp://ftp.tux.org/pub/distributions/mandrake/8.2/i 586/ (Virginia)

ftp://ftp.umr.edu/pub/linux/mandrake/Mandrake/8.2/ i586/ (Missouri)

ftp://ftp.uwsg.indiana.edu/linux/mandrake/8.2/i586 / (Indiana)

ftp://linux-cs.tccw.wku.edu/pub/linux/distribution s/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (WKU-Linux, Western Kentucky University)

ftp://mirror.aca.oakland.edu/linux/mandrake/8.2/i5 86/ (Michigan)

ftp://mirror.cs.wisc.edu/pub/mirrors/linux/Mandrak e/8.2/i586/ (Wisconsin)

ftp://mirror.mcs.anl.gov/pub/Mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Illinois)

ftp://mirrors.ptd.net/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (Pensylvania)

ftp://mirrors.secsup.org/pub/linux/mandrake/Mandra ke/8.2/i586/

ftp://uml-pub.ists.dartmouth.edu/mirrors/ftp.mandr akesoft.com/pub/Mandrake/mandrake/8.2/i586/ (New Hampshire)

ftp://videl.ics.hawaii.edu/mirrors/mandrake/Mandra ke/8.2/i586/ (Hawaii)

http://mandrake.dsi.internet2.edu/Mandrake/8.2/i58 6/ (For Internet2 academic institutions only)

Re:mirrors

[dotgod]

Oops...these are the real ones

Austria

ftp://gd.tuwien.ac.at/pub/linux/Mandrake-iso/i586/ (Vienna)
Czech Republic

ftp://mandrake.redbox.cz/Mandrake-iso/i586/

ftp://sunsite.mff.cuni.cz/OS/Linux/Dist/Mandrake/m andrake-iso/i586/ (Prague)
Estonia

ftp://ftp.aso.ee/pub/os/Linux/distributions/mandra ke-iso/i586/
France

ftp://fr2.rpmfind.net/linux/Mandrake-iso/i586/ (Lyon)

ftp://ftp.ciril.fr/pub/linux/mandrake-iso/i586/ (Nancy)

ftp://ftp.proxad.net/pub/Distributions_Linux/Mandr ake-iso/i586/ (Paris)

ftp://linux.ups-tlse.fr/Mandrake-iso/i586/ (Toulouse)
Germany

ftp://ftp-stud.fht-esslingen.de/pub/Mirrors/Mandra ke-iso/i586/ (Esslingen)

ftp://ftp.join.uni-muenster.de/pub/linux/distribut ions/mandrake-iso/i586/ (Muenster)

ftp://ftp.uni-bayreuth.de/pub/linux/Mandrake-iso/i 586/ (bayreuth)
Hungary

ftp://ftp.linuxforum.hu/mirror/Mandrake-iso/i586/
Netherlands

ftp://ftp.nluug.nl/pub/os/Linux/distr/Mandrake/Man drake-iso/i586/

ftp://ftp.surfnet.nl/pub/os/Linux/distr/Mandrake/M andrake-iso/i586/
Russia

ftp://ftp.chg.ru/pub/Linux/mandrake-iso/i586/ (Chernogolovka)
Sweden

ftp://ftp.chello.se/pub/Linux/Mandrake-iso/i586/

ftp://ftp.du.se/pub/os/mandrake-iso/i586/ (Dalarma)
Taiwan

ftp://linux.cdpa.nsysu.edu.tw/pub/Mandrake/mandrak e-iso/i586/
United Kingdom

ftp://ftp.mirror.ac.uk/sites/sunsite.uio.no/pub/un ix/Linux/Mandrake/Mandrake-iso/i586/ (Canterbury)
United States

ftp://ftp.cse.buffalo.edu/pub/Linux/Mandrake/mandr ake-iso/i586/ (NY)

ftp://ftp.orst.edu/pub/mandrake-iso/i586/ (Oregon)

ftp://ftp.software.umn.edu/pub/linux/mandrake/Mand rake-iso/i586/ (Minnesota)

ftp://helios.dii.utk.edu/pub/linux/Mandrake/Mandra ke-iso/i586/ (Tennessee)

ftp://mirror.mcs.anl.gov/pub/Mandrake-iso/i586/ (Illinois)

ftp://mirrors.secsup.org/pub/linux/mandrake/Mandra ke-iso/i586/

ftp://raven.cslab.vt.edu/pub/linux/mandrake-iso/i5 86/ (Virgina)

ftp://videl.ics.hawaii.edu/mirrors/mandrake/Mandra ke-iso/i586/ (Hawaii)

Re:mirrors

[kryptobiotic]

Would somebody mod this up? Why are the wrong links +3 Informative and the correct ones 0 Redundant?

Re:mirrors

[*xpenguin*]

If you have links in your post, you'll get modded up, even if they're broken or incorrect.

Re:mirrors

[dotgod]

yeah, and i replied to my post with the correction immediately after, but the moderators didn't bother to read everything before moding up the post w/ the wrong links. They also didn't read the entire correction post that said "oops here are the right links" at the top and just modded it down as redundant.

This is good stuff

[mblase]

Okay, let me be clear from the beginning: I'm not a Linux user. I've only got so much computer hardware, and most of it is old Macintoshes with puny hard drives. I now have Mac OS X on my newest machine, and if I ever get the urge to start tinkering with UNIX goodies that's where I'll begin.

So I don't own, or use, Linux. But I've resolved to make Mandrake my distro when and if I decide to give it a try.

Not just because Mandrake's got a nearly-current PPC distro to go with their Intel-compatible ones, although that was what got their name to me in the first place. It's because they're packed with features, lots of options, both GNOME and K desktops, and an easy installation. If I were to put a Linux machine in front of my wife or daughter, it would be this one.

And now they've got v9.0 coming out the door. Nice. I know that you can't do everything with Linux that you can with a current Mac or PC; everyone knows that. But it looks like Mandrake covers all the essential bases -- internet, office, customizability, multimedia. I could give a family member this distro and they'd be able to do just about everything they needed.

If there's any Linux that's ready for the consumers, it's this one. Mandrake deserves to be known as the hardest-working distro development company as far as sheer user-friendliness is concerned. I'm glad it's free, but they're clearly worth the money.

Re:This is good stuff

[Arandir]

Let me get this straight: you don't use Linux, let alone Mandrake, yet you're spouting off on the benefits of Mandrake...

Your stated benefits for Mandrake also apply to several other distros. Did you just not get the time to read the back of their boxes as well? Mandrake might be the best Linux distro for you. But there is no way you can tell until you actually have some experience under your belt.

Re:This is good stuff

[disappear]

So I don't own, or use, Linux. But I've resolved to make Mandrake my distro when and if I decide to give it a try.

Translation: I don't have the slightest idea what I'm talking about. But I've made some decisions.

they're packed with features, lots of options, both GNOME and K desktops, and an easy installation

Translation: I can read the website, and this is what it says.

The fact is, any mainstream general-purpose Linux distribution has both GNOME and KDE, tons of features, and tons of options. While Mandrake's installer is nice, it's not worlds ahead of anybody else's anymore. (OK, it's ahead of Debian's in terms of user-friendliness, but what isn't?) Heck, even the Red Hat's installer is friendly these days.

Nice. I know that you can't do everything with Linux that you can with a current Mac or PC; everyone knows that.

Translation: I'm a troll. Don't take me seriously.

Re:This is good stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude. You are already tinkering with UNIX - Mac OSX *IS* UNIX.

Re:This is good stuff

[gotak]

You don't use it so you don't have a damn idea bout just how bad it was in the 8.2 version.

It was not pretty how freaking annonyingly bad it was. I switched to gentoo after a month of watching mozilla crash for no reasons. And at work after installing fresh on two machine and watching it crash because of supermount and get this.. total hard hang when you try to copy files using konqurer but works in command line. Go figure.

Anyhow I hope this isn't a reflection on the money trouble but mandrake has been getting worse over time.

Re:This is good stuff

[Dark Paladin]

all right, just to help the clueless.

Look at the parent post about "I use debian, but I like mandrake, blah, blah, blah".

Then, look at the follow up - "I use OS X, but I like mandrake, blah, blah, blah".

It's called "joke" or "sarcasm".

Re:This is good stuff

[Arandir]

It's called "joke" or "sarcasm".

Hmmmph! I'm a Slashdot poster. I don't have a sense of humor.

Re:This is good stuff

[dciman]

The guy talking about OSX said he likes Mandrake but has actually never used it. I don't think it is quite the same. I have used Both Debain and Drake over the years and was just commenting on a general sense of how the mandrake team build their distro and its interaction with the end users. As a bit more discriminating user I much prefer the design qualities of Debin and its upgrade path. I was just giving Mandrake its deserved props for doing a good job of building a distro for their target market.

Re:This is good stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

8.2 works without a hitch for me. Just because it doesn't work for you doesn't mean it's bad.

Re:This is good stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

hehe I used to be in a band called mblase. we sucked.

Re:This is good stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

He says he's a Mac user. Obviously he spends most of his time reading the colored labeling on the package.

Re:This is good stuff

[JPriest]

According to Mandrake they have been moving closer to claiming a profit. I believe they stated their loses for this last quarter were 1/4 of the previous. Reguardless, they are doing quite a bit better since the "help mandrake, subscibe as a user" article that was posted on /. just before the 8.2 release.The recent walmart deal will probably help some too.

They always have been incompatible

[ehudokai]

In versions up to the present for the past few years they have compiled with gcc 2.96.x which if you read the docs on the gnu gcc web site specifically stated that it was developement and SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR PRODUCTION

Although this is better since 3.1 is not a developement build. It doesn't surprise me in the least.

Mandrake has done a great job of creating a nice looking interface,but I have refused to use them (or redhat) because of their compiler.

Re:They always have been incompatible

[Anonymous Coward]

I heard that the redhat compiler is much better than the mandrake because they only 2.96 generation

Re:They always have been incompatible

[haystd]

Two sides to every argument:

http://www.bero.org/gcc296.html

Re:They always have been incompatible

[Anonymous Coward]

• gcc 2.96 is actually more standards compliant than any other version
  of gcc released at the time Red Hat made this decision (3.0 is even more compliant, but not as stable yet).
  It may not be standards compliant as in what most others
  are shipping, but 2.96 is almost fully ISO C99 and ISO C++ 98
  compliant, unlike any previous version of gcc.
• gcc 2.96 has more complete support for C++. Older versions of gcc could
  handle only a very limited subset of C++.
  Earlier versions of g++ often had problems with templates and other
  valid C++ constructs.
• Most of gcc 2.96's perceived bugs are actually broken code
  that older gccs accepted because they were not standards compliant - or, using
  an alternative term to express the same thing, buggy.
  A C or C++ compiler that doesn't speak the standardized C language is
  a bug, not a feature.
  In the initial version of gcc 2.96, there were a couple of other bugs.
  All known ones have been fixed in the version from updates - and the version
  that is in the current beta version of Red Hat Linux. The bugs in the initial
  version don't make the whole compiler broken, though. There has never been
  a 100% bug free compiler, or any other 100% bug free non-trivial program.
  The current version can be taken from Red Hat Linux 7.2. It will work
  without changes on prior 7.x releases of Red Hat Linux.
  Since a lot of people claim 2.96 is buggy because of the accusations
  found in MPlayer documentation, I have
  included the facts that led them to incorrectly believe that 2.96 is buggy
  here.
• gcc 2.96 generates better, more optimized code.
• gcc 2.96 supports all architectures Red Hat is currently supporting,
  including ia64. No other compiler can do this. Having to maintain different
  compilers for every different architecture is a development (find a bug, then
  fix it 4 times), QA and support nightmare.
• The binary incompatibility issues are not as bad as some people and
  companies make you believe.
  First of all, they affect dynamically linked C++ code only.
  If you don't use C++, you aren't affected. If you use C++ and link statically,
  you aren't affected.
  If you don't mind depending on a current glibc, you might also want to
  link statically to c++ libraries while linking dynamically to glibc and other
  C libraries you're using:
  g++ -o test test.cc -Wl,-Bstatic -lstdc++ -Wl,-Bdynamic
  (Thanks to Pavel Roskin for pointing this
  out)
  Second, the same issues appear with every major release of gcc
  so far. gcc 2.7.x C++ is not binary compatible with gcc 2.8.x. gcc 2.8.x C++
  is not binary compatible with egcs 1.0.x. egcs 1.0.x C++ is not binary
  compatible with egcs 1.1.x. egcs 1.1.x C++ is not binary compatible with
  gcc 2.95. gcc 2.95 C++ is not binary compatible with gcc 3.0.
  Besides, it can easily be circumvented. Either link statically, or
  simply distribute libstdc++ with your program and install it if necessary.
  Since it has a different soname, it can coexist with other libstdc++ versions
  without causing any problems.
  Red Hat Linux 7 also happens to be the first Linux distributions using
  the current version of glibc, 2.2.x. This update is not binary compatible with
  older distributions either (unless you update glibc - there's nothing that
  prevents you from updating libstdc++ at the same time), so complaining about
  gcc's new C++ ABI breaking binary compatibility is pointless. If you want
  to distribute something binary-only, link it statically and it will run
  everywhere.
  Someone has to be the first to take a step like this. If nobody dared
  to make a change because nobody else is doing it, we'd all still be using
  gcc 1.0, COBOL or ALGOL. No wait, all of those were new at some point...
• gcc 3.0, a so-called stable release (released quite
  some time after Red Hat released gcc 2.96-RH), fixes some problems, but
  introduces many others - for example, gcc 3.0.1 can't compile KDE 2.2
  correctly due to bugs in gcc 3.0.x's implementation in multiple inheritance
  in C++.
  With the recent release of gcc 3.1, there finally is a compiler that
  is better than 2.96 - but up until then (more than 18 months after the
  release of Red Hat Linux 7), gcc 2.96 was the best compiler available.

Re:They always have been incompatible

[Anonymous Coward]

> I have included the facts that led them to incorrectly believe that 2.96 is buggy here [slashdot.org].

"404 File Not Found

The requested URL (gcc296.html) was not found."

Re:They always have been incompatible

[elflord]

In versions up to the present for the past few years they have compiled with gcc 2.96.x which if you read the docs on the gnu gcc [gnu.org] web site specifically stated that it was developement and SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR PRODUCTION

Most criticisms of Redhats compiler release are without substance, and this is no exception.

• Redhats gcc 2.96 release was not a straight grab out of the CVS repository, it was Redhats fork of gcc. They added patches, and got it working properly.
• Redhat were right to fork. The release issued by the gcc project could not compile glibc on all target architectures. The gcc 3.0 release was late, and when there was a release, it was too broken to use for a distribution. The gcc project are certainly within their rights releasing something that meets the testing/release requirements they set, but what's good enough for the gcc project is not good enough for a Linux distributor. The linux distributor needs to be able to compile glibc on all architectures, and needs to compile KDE correctly.
• Hence not using those distributions "because of the compiler" is just plain ignorant. gcc 2.96 was the best free compiler available until the release of gcc 3.1., which has now taken the title.
• The main reason gcc 3.1 is incompatible with older releases is because the old releases have bugs that are fixed in gcc 3.1. The incompatibilities are caused by the improved ABI, and a more compliant standard library.

Re:They always have been incompatible

[deno]

And the reason why Mandrake went for 2.96 was very simple: once RehHat eat all the shit for releasing with somewhat unstable compiler, and fixed it gcc 2.96 became the best of all the available choices.

gcc 3.0 was too broken to replace it, but 3.1 looks better, and will be replaced with 3.2 by the time Mandrake Linux 9.0 hits the road. Time to switch...

Btw, 9.0beta1 doesn't really ship with gcc 3.1 - it's in fact a CVS version of what's going to be 3.2 in a few months.

Two options

[newton34]

You still have two options -- get the powers-that-be to compile and release a VM with gcc-3.1 compatibility, or don't use Mandrake 9.0b1. It's the same situation that Windows users find themselves in all the time, but this time it happens in the Linux world and we wonder what the fix is....

Re:Two options

[ShavenYak]

It's the same situation that Windows users find themselves in all the time, but this time it happens in the Linux world and we wonder what the fix is....

Really? There are programs compiled for Windows 3.1 that still work perfectly on XP. And Windows users certainly don't end up with incompatible software every time Microsoft updates VisualC++/C#Studio6.5.NET (or whatever the hell they call it nowadays).

Incidentally, could someone who understands the issues a bit better explain why every upgrade of GCC breaks binary compatibility? And, more importantly, will I be able to run Quake III on Mdk9.0?

Re:Two options

[Anonymous Coward]

Half the shit which compiled perfectly on VC6 throw a GPF on .Net. Now... why would that be? Hang on.... I see... they've changed MFC; which imho, should be called CrapFC

Re:Two options

[jay_in_pa]

Can't they just ship with multiple version
of shared libraries?

RH7.x does this so you can run binaries compiled
for RH6.2 as well as ones compiled for 7.x.

Re:Two options

[Arandir]

Incidentally, could someone who understands the issues a bit better explain why every upgrade of GCC breaks binary compatibility?

Short answer: the gcc crew is lazy, inconsiderate, or both.

Long answer: they keep changing the way they do C++ name mangling, keep changing the GNU-specific extensions, and keep changing the API for their "standard" C++ library. Once the ISO Standard for C++ was released a few years ago, the g++ ABI should have been finalized and set in stone. Yet g++-3.2 is not going to be backwardly compatible with g++-3.1. Aaargh!

Re:Two options

[DrXym]

Why not ship two versions of glibc and gcc? It seems like a fairly sensible way to maintain backwards compatibility while still allowing source-built apps the benefits of being built with a better compiler. It's been done before, I don't see what's different now.

If necessary you could even write "java", "javac", "javah" etc. scripts in /usr/bin which fixed up the lib paths before invoking the real tools.

Re:Two options

[Bollie]

Short answer: the gcc crew is lazy, inconsiderate, or both.

Look, in all fairness you have to extend that to the ANSI/ISO team too. We have waited YEARS to get the C++ standard out and EVERY SINGLE DRAFT changed the language immensely. (Can you still remember the for [int i](i=0;i10;i++) debacle?)

Not only that, but most of the standard breaks existing code. Most of the existing code. In fact, I would say, 90% of existing code. (The idiotic .h header extension change forces code to emit warnings or even errors).

In one sense, this is good. It promotes non-platform dependend coding. In another sense, this is bad. It promotes compilers that are widely disparate and temperamental.

So, to sum up: the GCC team is doing a fine job. Implementing ISO with a set of moving goalposts is done very well. After everyone got uptight because GCC 3.0 was delayed (because of this Red Hat probably forked off the "bastard son of gcc", 2.96) the GCC team decided to make the release schedule faster.

You ARE GOING TO GET BUGS IF YOU RELEASE FASTER! So there, you have two reasons to whine, one if GCC is bug-free and one if it is not! Enjoy!

Re:Two options

[Per Bothner]

Why did this get moderated to 5? It's nothing more than a polemic filled with vague and misleading half-truths.

they keep changing the way they do C++ name mangling ... and keep changing the API for their "standard" C++ library
If the ABI is incompatible, having name mangling be incompatible is a feature, not a bug. I don't believe the ABI changed from 3.0 to 3.1, and the changes from 3.1 to 3.2 are minor, unforeseen, unfortunate, but needed bug-fixes.

Once the ISO Standard for C++ was released a few years ago, the g++ ABI should have been finalized and set in stone. And where were you to help with this? The ISO Standard is very big and complex. Understanding all the implementation and ABI implications of the standard is very difficult. I doubt there is a single persion in the world who groks the entire standard, all the interactions, and how to implement it all.

But since you could obviously have done a much better job than the G++ implementors, why didn't you volunteer?

Re:Two options

[Anonymous Coward]

> You ARE GOING TO GET BUGS IF YOU RELEASE FASTER
No. You get bugs if you release faster and try to keep the same feature set. If you release often and reduce the feature set, you get *fewer* not more bugs.

Re:Two options

[Anonymous Coward]

"Short answer: the gcc crew is lazy, inconsiderate, or both."

That's a tad harsh on people who are volunteering their time for free. I'd say 'ya gets what ya pays for', but I don't think anyone purchasing Microsoft intends to buy security holes and bugs and on and on. Would seem that there's no perfect solution, but the folk giving it the old college try on their own time and without pay probably shouldn't be ragged on too harshly. In fact, quite the opposite.

Re:Two options

[elflord]

Once the ISO Standard for C++ was released a few years ago, the g++ ABI should have been finalized and set in stone.

They could indeed have done so, but they wouldn't have been able to test the new ABI until they had a release that implemented it, would they ? Anyone can mouth off about how they "should" have set the ABI in stone instantaneously, but when it comes to actually implementing it, and then fixing the bugs -- how many patches did you submit ?

Re:Two options

[elflord]

Why not ship two versions of glibc and gcc?

Shipping two versions of glibc doesn't really solve any problems-- you just end up with parallel sets of libraries (bloat).

Fortuantely, you need neither two compilers nor two glibc versions. Only C++ libraries are a problem. You need different versions of libstdc++. This is not a new problem. Most distributions already ship several different libstdc++ versions.

why not wait for 3.2?

[asteinberg]

I could be wrong about this, but I was under the impression that gcc-3.2 will be incompatible with 3.1, and therefore it seems strange for me for Mandrake to make the switch so quickly, when there are still some issues with 3.1 and it's more or less a dead-end in terms of compatibility. Hopefully they'll use 3.2 (scheduled for release within the next week according to the site) on the final version.

Oh, here's the quote from GCC's page about 3.2 incompatibility:

GCC 3.1 [sic, should be 3.2] has a number of C++ ABI fixes in it which make its C++ compiler binary incompatible with the C++ compilers found in earlier GCC releases, including GCC 3.1 and GCC 3.1.1

.

Re:why not wait for 3.2?

[Arandir]

I'm still waiting for the day when the GCC crew gets a clue. Proper prior planning prevents perennial problems. There's absolutely no reason for this incompatibility.

ISO Standard C++ is not changing, so there's no reason to change the ABI. If you have to change the ABI it can only mean that they did it wrong the first time. They *know* that G++ is eventually going to be 100% standard C++ compliant, so they should have finalized the ABI as soon as possible after the standard was released.

Re:why not wait for 3.2?

[red_dragon]

I wouldn't worry too much, really. After all, this is only the first beta, and will hopefully have some time to switch to GCC 3.2. Such a change should be pretty smooth, given that the only item in the list of changes on the page you mentioned is:

• The C++ ABI now conforms to the V3 multi-vendor standard.

I sincerely hope that GCC's C++ ABI remains stable from here on. It has been, IIRC, the single biggest source of incompatible GCC version issues.

Re:why not wait for 3.2?

[Anonymous Coward]

You obviously have no idea about c++ compilers

Re:why not wait for 3.2?

[dvdeug]

There's absolutely no reason for this incompatibility.

The 3.1 (= IA64) C++ ABI was supposed to be the end-all and be-all of ABI's. Unfortunately, they made a few minor mistakes in implementation, and are trying to fix it before everyone starts using 3.1. I'm sure in your perfection, you wouldn't have made that mistake, but you haven't seen fit to grace GCC with your presence, so it has to struggle on without you.

Re:why not wait for 3.2?

[elflord]

I'm still waiting for the day when the GCC crew gets a clue. Proper prior planning prevents perennial problems. There's absolutely no reason for this incompatibility.

In the real world, you inevitablty discover bugs after the release. The incompatibilities were inevitable-- the standard library implementation has been severely broken in all releases prior to 3.0 (for example, std:: not working properly, the class heirarchy itself is not as described in the standard, and there are important classes missing) So prior to gcc 3.0, the reasons for the incompatibilities, is that they were still in the process of implementing a (close to) conforming compiler. Post gcc 3.0, they're ironing out the bugs.

Compared to other C++ implementations, gcc is actually doing pretty well with regards to standards compliance. There are some popular compilers that still don't have partial template specialisation working.

If you followed the gcc mailing lists, you'd realise that these guys aren't clowns. The gcc project use automated tests, and careful bug tracking. To the extent that they've made mistakes (for example, inadequate checking of their C++ compiler), they've tried to learn from them. It's a large project, and arguably one of the better managed ones around.

Re:why not wait for 3.2?

[Arandir]

Post gcc 3.0, they're ironing out the bugs.

My problem isn't that they're ironing out bugs, but that they're putting ABI breaking bug fixes into a *stable* branch. A minor version change should never break backwards compatibility.

Re:why not wait for 3.2?

[Anonymous Coward]

My problem isn't that they're ironing out bugs, but that they're putting ABI breaking bug fixes into a *stable* branch. A minor version change should never break backwards compatibility.

Your only problem is your ignorance. Point-releases aren't minor. (why do you think they've only changed the primary version number once in the last 10 years ?)

Another GCC nightmare ahead

[jmv]

I've seen the beta ships with gcc 3.1.1. If this holds for the release, that means there's going to be yet another C++ ABI incompatibility when gcc 3.2 comes out. I just hope RedHat 8.0 and Mandrake 9.0 both ship with the same compiler.

Re:Another GCC nightmare ahead

[Clue4All]

Both RedHat and Mandrake are switching to 3.2 with their betas when it's released in a week or two. The C++ ABI change is pretty small and won't affect a lot of programs out there.

but not in mozilla

[Anonymous Coward]

to use java plugins, you'd hafta get packages of mozilla that were compiled with the same gcc version that sun used

linuxgames?

[Anonymous Coward]

So, Quake 3 and kohan work with this new version of gcc?

Re:linuxgames?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, that would require access to the source code...

Re:linuxgames?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do these games need to be re-compiled?

Its not like anyone is putting patches out for them anyway.

Re:linuxgames?

[Tersevs]

Isnt enough to save a copy of the old libs and set up the LDD_PRELOAD?

mandrake and gentoo

[xcable_hhh]

I have used Mandrake as my server OS, desktop, and laptop OS for years now (since 6.x if i rememeber correctly). I really like the some features that Mandrake has (the Control Center, drake, etc..). But I have started using Gentoo, and now i'm in love again. The last Mandrake install 8.2 was just.....to easy, everything worked off the bat. With Gentoo you have to work a lot at the beginning and have a lot more control. The next gentoo install CD will use GCC 3.1. Portage KICKS ASS. Every distro should use something simular. It's some much better than RPM hell (reminds me of dll hell).

heath

# emerge rsync
# emerge exit
# exit

Re:mandrake and gentoo

[Anonymous Coward]

Portage is a baby.
emerge kde
this works fine. But
emerge kde unmerge
doesn't work.
Portage can't even unmerge packages easily.
Even an 'emerge libpng' doesn't warn you
that with this you break many packages.
Portage is about 2-3 years behind rpm or
debian. People who said Portage is the best
never made an objective comparision.

Re:mandrake and gentoo

[diamondc]

Yeah.. wait 12 hours for KDE and X to build, when I can have it installed and expertly packaged by Debian developers in less than 15 minutes (i'm on DSL). The, at most, 5% speed increase to me isn't worth the wait of compiling EVERY SINGLE PIECE Of software on your computer.

Re:mandrake and gentoo

[Anonymous Coward]

wait for it to compile? or set it to compile, go to sleep, at work check on it, if its done, hit some smaller packages.

I isntalled gentoo last night, and most software is very fast to build.

X and kde are exceptions

Re:mandrake and gentoo

[carlivar]

Wait 12 hours for KDE and X? How about waiting 3 months with Debian. Don't get me wrong, I love Debian, but it's getting ridiculous that there's still no official KDE 3 packages. (note the word official, I know there are some packages out there, but they still aren't in sid).

Carl

Re:mandrake and gentoo

[QueefChief]

Good point. I'd mod you up, but I can't. I use debian, and I've used Mandrake. I'm not loyal to any one in particular, I just use which one works for me at the time. I personally think zealots are worse than trolls. At least trolls are funny.

Re:mandrake and gentoo

[10Ghz]

Wait 12 hours for KDE and X? How about waiting 3 months with Debian.

Touche!

I myself am planning to move to Gentoo from Debian soon. Propably when they release the GCC3.1 using version.

Re:mandrake and gentoo

[diamondc]

Those kde3 debs that are not officially in unstable have been tested for months, already. I use them on my laptop and workstation. I only get Konqueror crashes when using flash. They are not in unstable for good reasons (waiting for Woody to be released and gcc-3.1).

Re:mandrake and gentoo

[Anonymous Coward]

Jesus H Christ, you say you love debian but you b*tch and moan about now some packages aren't officially packaged and released on the same day as the upsteam version? There are very damn good reasons as to why something like XFree86 4.2.0 or KDE 3 are not in sid yet. It would be nice would it not if you were running debian on a sparc and the new X wouldn't work because it was severely broken on it. There are other people out there not using x86 hardware and they deserve to get the same quality of software as anyone else using another one of the'supported' platform with Debian.

WTF???

[Andy Dodd]

How can GCC break Kai's PhotoSoap???

PhotoSoap is a Windows application, it didn't run under Linux (except for maybe under WINE) to begin with.

Re:WTF???

[Anonymous Coward]

gcc runs on Windows, too. There are two ports: MinGW and cygwin. It also runs under MSDOS (DJGPP).

Never assume that because something is standard on Linux, that it only runs on Linux. (gcc runs pretty much everywhere...) Has it ever occurred to you that Windows users might want to use some of these tools? After all, Linux relies on them, so they're supposedly good for something. Or what about *gasp* UNIX users who don't run Linux? When gcc was written, there was no "Linux".

Re:WTF???

[Campioni]

Hi! But he actually says he "Sorry, I love Mandrake, but I'm not going to upgrade until they squish that GCC bug.". Why not upgrade Mandrake if gcc doesn't work with his Windows software? I guess we'll never know Campioni

If you are interested in purchasing this CD-r set:

[pheph]

A company I do work for is selling (3) CD-r sets of this distribution for $2.49. $0.50 is donated to misc. Open Source and $0.50 is donated directly to Mandrake for their hardwork in creating this distribution.

If you are interested, please see Open Soars Mandrake Linux 9.0 Beta 1 Product Page.

I'm sure its a step forward, but...

[bafreer]

right now all of my hardware works properly under Mandrake 8.2 . My Geforce4 works fine with the Nvidia drivers, and I have installed KDE 3 and Gnome 2 independantly. Maybe if make another system I'll put on 9.0, but right now I'm trying to thin-down the bloatedness, not increase it. Great job Mandrake, I like your distro, I just need a faster system. Keep up the good work!

Linux Useability

[Parsa]

We always ask questions and ponder why Linux isn't more prevalent on the desktop. I think this post and thread is a perfect example of why it isn't.

Look at all the fuss over gcc 3.1 not being compatible with Java, other software packages and even 3.2 that is suppose to be out soon. The average user doesn't want to have to deal with that.

I myself have used Mandrake for about 3 years now and love it, and will buy the retail package when it comes out in stores. But I don't expect my 70 something year old grandfather to deal with gcc version compatibility when all he wants to do is email and look up stuff he watched on Discovery or The History Channel.

Re:Linux Useability

[FooBarWidget]

The average user doesn't NEED to deal with the incompatibilities. The Mandrake CD contains everything he needs, and is compatible with the system. Only advanced users need software that isn't on the CD, but advanced users can compile the source code and make it work.

Java does not work in this beta, but hey, it's a beta!

Re:Linux Useability

[eaddict]

The Mandrake CD contains everything he needs

Wrong. Does it have games? Minesweeper? Nope, Diablo... And I don't know how many other applications I have added to my Windows system even though windows shipped with a version of an app I added. MS Paint? Right. Paint Shop Pro for me. The same goes for default shipments of Linux.

Remember your heros

Re:Linux Useability

[GigsVT]

The average user doens't have to worry about that. It's the distro/package maintainer's job to worry about stuff like that for the average user.

Re:Linux Useability

[Arandir]

There's a lot of truth in what you say. But it isn't the fault of Linux, it's the fault of the distros. Mandrake (and most of the other "friendly" distros) are living on the bleeding edge. What is needed for greater acceptance on the desktop is a distro that is as conservative as Debian but as "friendly" as Mandrake. But while such a distro will be good for the newbie, it won't be accepted by the community.

Case in point: Corel LinuxOS. It was exactly what the newbie needed, but it was panned out of existance for not being a power-user's distro.

Re:Linux Useability

[FooBarWidget]

> Wrong. Does it have games? Minesweeper? Nope, Diablo...

Diablo isn't even available for Linux.

> MS Paint? Right. Paint Shop Pro for me.

Gimp's power rivals that of Paint Shop Pro. Besides, PSP isn't even available for Linux. There's no commercial paint program for Linux that can compete with Gimp.

Re:Linux Useability

[CJ Hooknose]

The Mandrake CD contains everything he needs

Wrong. Does it have games? Minesweeper? Nope

Are you trolling, or just misinformed? The kdegames package (included with every distro that includes KDE) has "KMines", which is a Minesweeper clone. GNOME has "gnomines". Both these are included under the "games" tab in the K menu ("Start menu") in an installation of SuSE 8.0, and I'd certainly be amazed if Mandrake didn't put them in a similar place.

Diablo?

There's no Diablo for Linux, so it's not on the installation CDs for any distro. You can install Falcons Eye Nethack for something arguably better than Diablo, or Zangband for, again, something arguably better than Diablo.

Falconseye Nethack is on many distro CDs, Zangband is not.

MS Paint? Right. Paint Shop Pro for me. The same goes for default shipments of Linux

GIMP comes with every distro, and is as good or better than PaintShop Pro. Curiously, you haven't mentioned any Linux applications in your half-formed rant, only Windows applications. What, praytell, are some examples of applications you think you need that aren't included in a recent distro CD or aren't available via Sourceforge/freshmeat.net ?

Re:Linux Useability

[phutureboy]

Actually, Corel Linux was supposedly resurrected as Xandros Linux, however I have seen little activity on their web site over the past few months. Shame, really. Seemed like a good effort.

Re:Linux Useability

[BiteMyShinyMetalAss]

CorelOS/Xandros isn't dead... Lindows uses it as its base, and from some low-key demos up here in Canada, it's looking just fine.

Re:Linux Useability

[Anonymous Coward]

> We always ask questions and ponder why Linux isn't more prevalent on the desktop. I think this post and thread is a perfect example of why it isn't.
> Look at all the fuss over gcc 3.1 not being compatible with Java, other software packages and even 3.2 that is suppose to be out soon. The average user doesn't want to have to deal with that.

Please write on the blackboard, 100 times:

This is a BETA release, I won't judge the product by a BETA.
This is a BETA release, I won't judge the product by a BETA.
This is a BETA release, I won't judge the product by a BETA.
This is a BETA release, I won't judge the product by a BETA.
.
.
.

If Mandrake 9.0 final still has these issues, you've got a valid point. Until then, no more FUD.

Re:Linux Useability

[DGolden]

Photogenics doesn't even try to compete with GIMP for image processing, but it is much better than GIMP for original composition. GIMP absolutely sucks if you are trying to draw a picture from scratch (that's why it's "image manipulation program")

Photogenics used in conjunction with Gimp on Linux is pretty good...

Re:Linux Useability

[Flywheel]

No the average user does not have to deal with that, but some of the "normal" users do want to use some of the tools, for instance when running Java applications like the LimeWire Gnutella Client, they expect the foundation to work ...
Which actually means that threads like these is mor critical than ever, due to the amount of feedback...

I have a friend that believes that a computer should just work...she doesn't want and need to get all technical and - like - develop new software, and cannot understand that anybody else should, that anybody want to - Well, somebody has to get all technical and for instance develop new software, otherwise her computer wouldn't - just work - as she like it to....

RedHat Limbo

[DeadBugs]

The new Redhat Beta "Limbo" has a similiar feature set that includes gcc 3.1. Seeing that Mandrake is based off of Redhat they are probably just moving right along following Redhat's lead

Mandrake all the way.

[$criptah]

Although I am a FreeBSD dude, I loved my workstation running Mandrake. I think they do an excellent job by trying to make the system more optimized for an end user, rather than a professional sys. admin. For a while, I thought that RedHat was the most user friendly, but I was wrong. The installation process was very smooth and clean, that's where most of Linux distros lag behind. With this in mind, I am thinking of getting the latest Mandrake release and putting it on my moms computer. I've heard that she is sick of 'those blue screens' :)

Re:Mandrake all the way.

[Jucius Maximus]

"With this in mind, I am thinking of getting the latest Mandrake release and putting it on my moms computer."

If you want to keep your mom out of the Mandrake beta-version waters, she will have to stick to mandrake 8.2 for a while since, according to the beta testers page* Mandrake 9 is projected for release in October.

* Look at the section where beta testers can get a discount on the Mandrake 9 DVD. It says the projected release is in October 2002.

Re:Mandrake all the way.

[leviramsey]

Mandrake 9.0 will, according to various insider posts on the Mandrake Cooker mailing list (Warly, IIRC), be out around September 15, give or take a week.

Re:Mandrake all the way.

[Jucius Maximus]

" Mandrake 9.0 will, according to various insider posts on the Mandrake Cooker mailing list (Warly, IIRC), be out around September 15, give or take a week."

Hey thanks ... I introduced Mandrake 8 to my father who has gotten quite into linux and away from win2k. He asked me to find out for him when v.9 was coming out.

Mandrake 8.0 Woes

[CaffeineAddict2001]

froze instantly as soon as I put in my Orinoco wireless PCMCIA card. =(

That and it didn't have accelerated ATI Radeon 7500 Mobility drivers.

Maybe these issues will be fixed now?
Please? *cries*

Re:Mandrake 8.0 Woes

[Jack Hughes]

Try using external pcmcia rather than in-kernel (requires a kernel rebuild of course, but you only need to change the one option)

Re:Mandrake 8.0 Woes

[shadow303]

The PCMCIA stuff with 8.0 really sucked. My ethernet card refused to work with it, even though it was supposed to work. My problem was straightened out by 8.1. You might want to give the new version a try (or wait for the full 9.0 and not just the beta).

Re:Mandrake 8.0 Woes

[jiminim]

8.1 loves my Orinoco in my Thinkpad 770, detected it automatically on install :)

Re:Mandrake 8.0 Woes

[RandomPeon]

IMHE Mandrake 8.2 has excellent PMCIA support. Might want to try it.

My story is the opposite Windows 98 freezes instantly when I pop in my 3Com ethernet card - after 3 tries and one corrupted partition I gave up. Mandrake 8.2 detects the NIC, loads the driver, and calls up the DHCP server without any trouble.

Looks like it

[wiredog]

Redhat 8.0 beta uses gcc 3.1

Stop whining

[FU_Fish]

I don't believe that most of the people here complaining about the move to gcc3 would be doing some if it were some other distribution in question. For some reason, a lot of people spend their time looking for reasons to gripe about Mandrake. Open your eyes a bit and you'll see that Mandrake is just pushing other distributions to finally making the move.

If you look at the most recent beta directory on the RedHat FTP server limbo, you'll notice that RH is making the move to gcc3 too. So, you people that are against making the move to gcc3, for whatever your reason, you're going to start to run out of distributions that you can use pretty soon. In the mean-time, stop whining.

Re:Stop whining

[liquidsin]

You can't use RedHat as an example either - it's too user friendly. It seems to me that the people who whine about distros (mostly rh and mdk) have something against the really user friendly distros. If it works right out of the box, it's not 1337 enough for them. They need to spend weeks getting debian to recognize their hardware or hand editing their slack config files. I think it's an ego thing. I'll be sticking with mandrake 8.2 for now, but I'll upgrade to 9.0 once it's stable. I guess I'm one of the few "geeks" who wants his linux quick and easy. As far as I'm concerned, mandrake is the easiest and most user friendly distro to install and use. And as far as gcc 3.1 breaking compatability with apps, I guess the developers should get on the ball and build their libs with the latest version of the compiler, although I hope mdk9 is based on gcc 3.2, and not 3.1.

get 2.95 apps to work with 3.1 comiled mozilla

[Garion911]

Since my other post was under a bunch of score:1 posts:

To compile your own 3.1 Java (wahoo, a JVM w/ optimizations!)

http://hints.linuxfromscratch.org/hints/javafrom sc ratch.txt

Also, you CAN get flash to work, there's a post in gentoo's message boards on how to do this:

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=4753

Hope this helps.

Big ISO

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, look at the size of them there ISO's

How prey tell do I burn a bugger like that?
Overburn?

Return to Castle Wolfenstein

[UVABlows]

Does anyone know if Return to Castle Wolfenstein will run with Mandrake 9.0?

Re:Return to Castle Wolfenstein

[Screaming Lunatic]

Why wouldn't it? I have RH7.3 and it runs perfectly. Even better than the windoze client.

Re:Return to Castle Wolfenstein

[Apostata]

Considering the Beta was just released, and 9.0 probably won't be out in another 2 months, I'd say your post is a little premature.

Re:Return to Castle Wolfenstein

[UVABlows]

Mandrake is planning to use a different compiler with 9.0 than Redhat 7.3 and Mandrake 8.2 (where RTCW runs like a champ). I don't know much about this binary incompatibleness that is spoken of.

Re:Return to Castle Wolfenstein

[UVABlows]

Why? "Will" refers to the future. If someone runs it on the beta successfully, there is a pretty good chance it will run on the final version. Agreed?

Re:Return to Castle Wolfenstein

[Anonymous Coward]

How the hell is this offtopic?

Re:Return to Castle Wolfenstein

[Anonymous Coward]

RtCW is illegal in Germany.

Re:Return to Castle Wolfenstein

[Apostata]

If we were talking about Debian, I'd absolutely agree. Knowing Mandrake (using Mandrake), and knowing that The Latest Software will be included in the final release, I wouldn't hold my breath.

I didn't mean offence to Will, to set the record straight...just didn't want him to get his hopes up on a quick (or accurate) reply.

Latest and Greatest, eh?

[nburtner]

Of course you will find the latest & greatest versions of the main packages, including:

* kernel 2.4.19 RC1
* *
* XFree86 4.2, which supports many video cards previously only supported in 3.3.6
* glibc 2.2.5
* Apache 1.3.26
* Evolution 1.08
* KDE 3.0.2
* GNOME 2.0
* Galeon 1.2.5
* Mozilla 1.0.0
* GCC 3.1.1
* and much more

I thought apache 2.0 was out...

Just think that's funny.

Re:Latest and Greatest, eh?

[ShavenYak]

There were some Apache 2.0 RPMS in the Contribs directory a while back, but they're gone now, at least on the mirror I'm looking at. It's hard to believe Mandrake is willing to go out on a limb with Gnome 2.0 but not Apache 2.0 - that's certainly the opposite of what my intuition tells me will be the more stable of the two packages.

Re:Latest and Greatest, eh?

[vjl]

PHP doesn't run in 2.0 [as a lot of modules don't yet]. Apache 2.0 is more than just a simple upgrade to the 1.x series. There are a lot of compatibilty issues, which is probably why Mandrake doesn't include it in their 9.0 beta. /vjl/

Re:Latest and Greatest, eh?

[Mongr]

There are Apache 2.0 rpms in testing right now for download from mandrakeclub.com

KDE 3.1

[DeadBugs]

It would be nice if they included KDE 3.1 (alpha). That way I can try and break 2 birds with one stone.

Of course I could install it seperately but I'm lazy

Re:KDE 3.1

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummm, no.

Advantage of Mandrake over Redhat?

[Sanity]

I am a long-time Redhat user, and am curious as to what might persuade me to switch to one of the other RPM-based distributions such as Mandrake. Can anyone out there list the main differences?

Re:Advantage of Mandrake over Redhat?

[UVABlows]

I've only seen a couple. Mandrake includes these features that I haven't seen in Redhat (notice I'm not saying "aren't there", just "I haven't seen", so correct me if Redhat contains these):

• Installs updates during installation
• Drakfont - gui for importing fonts from windows
• Devfs, can tell easier if a device is actually there
• Drakgw - gui for configuring a firewall/connection sharing machine, it works very well
• urpmi - like apt-get for rpms, VERY nice (I know a long time redhat user who switched to mdk because of this)
• Minimal install - you can install a very stripped down system (65mb mandrake claims)

  There's no doubt more than this, this is all I could come up with of the top of my head.

Re:Advantage of Mandrake over Redhat?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ive used every distro from slackware to debian to red hat to mandrake and Ive been using Linux since 1997. Slackware is the most stable and least innovative distro. Use it only for servers or on older hardware since it doesnt support anything new. Debian is perfect. Supports more modern stuff innovative very stable and fairly easy to use. Redhat is the most innovative distro out there but it isnt very stable, use it on your desktop but not on a server. Mandrake basically takes Redhat and improves on it. Its a bit more stable and easier to use but also more bloated than Redhat. Mandrake has better hardware support but can easily fill your hard drive with stuff you will never need. Debian is my favorite but Mandrake is a close second. I would only use slackware on a server and I use Redhat for development(since it rules the linux world).Ive got Mandrake on my notebook, Debian on my dual os workstation, slackware on all my servers and Redhat in the office. I also use Windows 2000 on my debian box, but only out of need.

Re:Advantage of Mandrake over Redhat?

[Anonymous Coward]

Red Hat's installer choked on my SCSI card (Adaptec 2904U or something like that).

EVERY other OS I put on there (Mandrake, Debian 2.2r5, Win2K Adv. Server, Gentoo, etc.) all worked just fine, but Red Hat wouldn't go. I tried old Red Hat (6.2) and new Red Hat (7.2) and neither worked.

Oh well... Mandrake is running perfectly on that system.

Re:Advantage of Mandrake over Redhat?

[Anonymous Coward]

Besides the control panel which makes everything a piece of cake, one word (app actually): URPMI! It's just like apt-get for debian. It downloads all the rpms and dependencies you need.

For example, I just installed mandrake 9.0beta1, all I have to do is go into the control panel, select Mandrake Update and tell it to use cooker (code name for devel version). It then uses urpmi to keep every package up to date insteading of having to download a new iso each time a beta or rc is released.

Re:Advantage of Mandrake over Redhat?

[elflord]

I am a long-time Redhat user, and am curious as to what might persuade me to switch to one of the other RPM-based distributions such as Mandrake. Can anyone out there list the main differences?

IMHO, Redhat do a much better job at standing behind their distribution. Updates are available, even for relatively old distributions. With Mandrake, the older releases of their distributions are often orphaned, and you end up on an upgrade treadmill. On the other hand, Redhat expect that a lot of their users will only run .2 releases, and never install a .0 release.

Redhat are a bigger and older company, and I trust them to stand behind their product more than I trust Mandrake.

java does compile with 3.1

[ehorizon]

I use Gentoo (1.3b) and need Java for various reasons. I followed the instructions at http://hints.linuxfromscratch.org/hints/javafromsc ratch.txt and it worked perfectly.

Another good argument for switching to the new gcc compiler is processor specific optimizations. For example; I set my CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS with "-march=pentium4 -mpfmath=sse -msse2" and so on. What I get is a highly optimized linux systems for my P4 box. And it's REALLY fast.

Not True.

[FU_Fish]

1- Yes, Limbo uses gcc3 also.
2- Mandrake WAS based off of RedHat 3+ years ago...it IS NOT now, nor has it been for quite some time. Mandrake and Redhat have completely different production cycles. When will Mandrake get out from the stigma that they started off based on RH?

Re:Not True.

[$criptah]

I concur. Although Mandrake looked like RedHat on steroids at the beginning... damn those were pretty good steroids that eventually made it a quite different distro. I found that Mandrake was much better polished and suitable for an end user. Again, that is my opinion and I am not trying to enforce it on everybody.

Re:Not True.

[disappear]

When will Mandrake get out from the stigma that they started off based on RH?

You mean, before or after they run out of money?

I'm not bothered by the fact that they based their older distributions on Red Hat. I am bothered that they are constantly begging for money.

Re:Not True.

[Anonymous Coward]

"When will Mandrake get out from the stigma that they started off based on RH?"

When they stop copying all the patches from Red Hat and do some work on the non-fluff themselves.

Re:Not True.

[Anonymous Coward]

> You mean, before or after they run out of money?

http://www.mandrakesoft.com/company/investors/ne ws letter/sn020722

(watch out for the space in "news letter")

Re:Not True.

[FU_Fish]

I think that if you'd try to find hard evidence of this claim, you'll find that most of the patch flow goes the other direction. I can't prove that, but I don't believe that one can prove the above statement either.

Right here :)

[timothy]

Actually, we did run a post on the release of Debian 3.0. The URL is here:

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/07/19/2214 21 1&mode=thread&tid=90

Many people apparently didn't see it though, since it's still coming into the submissions bin quite a bit. Proof that it's possible to miss Slashdot stories, if any was needed :) (Says a repentant offender.)

Now -- Gee michael, thanks a lot, now my expected download of Mandrake is going to last well into tomorrow ;)

timothy

Re:Right here :)

[Storm Damage]

Thank you. I've been "politely" shown the way to that article no fewer than 6 times now.

I think the reason for so many people missing it, is that story ran Friday evening, and was scrolled out of the "Older News" slashbox (not to mention the front page) by the time we got back into work on Monday...

Perhaps a Slashback-like "Best of the Weekend" report on Monday morning would alleviate this problem...

Proprietary, not Commercial

[Cyclops]

To the article poster and to all who can't distinguish, here is a rule that you should learn:

Proprietary Software != Commercial Software

It's proprietary software (regardless of being commercial or not -- realplayer is proprietary but free of charge) that will not work. This is due to the usual bad support that proprietary software vendors inflict upon the consumers.

With Free Software (regardless of being commercial or not -- Mandrake cd's can be bought), you can recompile (if someone's not done that for you already) in order to have it work on this new environment, regardless of the wish for profit of the vendor. If you don't have the expertise, you can ask someone else to do it for you (either gratis or for some amount of money).

So remember kids:
There is Proprietary Software which is not commercial
There is Free Software that is commercial
Proprietary has nothing to do with Commercial

my opinion

[greechneb]

Methinks that Mandrake has found a niche where they can get people to buy/download their versions every 4-6 months because they would rather spend their time on the beach than upgrade 100 programs or more with to keep their system up to date. Its much easier to buy a new version than download updates to individual programs all the time. Not saying that is the right way, but it is easier.

Re:my opinion

[swillden]

Nah...

gratch# apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade

...is much easier. Even if you have a slow connection; just walk away. It'll finish eventually. I think urpmi will do much the same thing for Mandrake.

If you have to pay per-minute connection charges, it may be *cheaper* to buy rather than download, but never easier.

Re:my opinion

[jred]

That's true. I sometimes wonder if the problems I have with Mandrake's update tool (I rarely get it to work properly, but that may be a problem w/ the mirrors) are some subtle hint that I need to upgrade. And I usually do.

Re:my opinion

[leviramsey]

[levi@tatiana levi] sudo urpmi.update Cooker && sudo urpmi --auto-select

If you want to update all the sources (except for those based on removable media), do a

urpmi.update -a

.

FTP Installation?

[illsorted]

Does anyone know if you can perform an FTP based installation a la FreeBSD? I did a quick search and it looks possible with 7.x, but I couldn't find anything on 8.x or 9.0 beta.

Re:FTP Installation?

[winne too]

i haven't tried with 9.0 beta, but it worked with 8.2

Re:FTP Installation?

[drsoran]

Does anyone know if you can perform an FTP based installation a la FreeBSD? I did a quick search and it looks possible with 7.x, but I couldn't find anything on 8.x or 9.0 beta.

Well, it's supported FTP installation since at least version 6. Just get the network.img and dd it onto a floppy. That's all you should need as long as you have a more common ethernet adapter.

ATI Radeon 7500 Mobility

[wiredog]

it didn't have accelerated ATI Radeon 7500 Mobility drivers

From what I've heard, Windows doesn't have (decent) drivers for that card...

Re:ATI Radeon 7500 Mobility

[CaffeineAddict2001]

Works beautifully in WinXP (once you patch the refresh rate thing)

DLL Hell the other option

[eaddict]

The average user doesn't want to have to deal with that

Bingo.

I have enough problems with Windows and all the system/DLL issues. I was hoping Linux would be a tad easier - WRONG. Until Linux can emulate the ease of install that Windows has it is doomed to the techies.

Remember your heros

Re:DLL Hell the other option

[FooBarWidget]

At least in Linux the problem can be fixed by recompiling it. The DLL hell is a whole different problem.

Re:DLL Hell the other option

[Anonymous Coward]

Right. I want you to walk my mom or sister through a recompile.

what about netbsd

[LiquidPC]

slashdot is unbelievable, they post BETA info of mandrake on the FRONT page but not NetBSD 1.5.3 being released yesterday. This is a BETA release for crying out loud, it's even more buggy than mandrake is when it's actually released. slashdot editors need a kick in the head for being linux-infatuated rejects.

Re:what about netbsd

[Junior Macintosh]

While I agree with you on the NetBSD point, calling the slashdot editors "linux-infatuated rejects", only shows that you might be a bsd-infatuated reject.

Compiler goodness.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't see what the big deal about Mandrake shipping an oddball compiler is all of a sudden. They've been shipping with gcc 2.96 since Mandrake 8.0 -- it's actually why I switched to SuSE. Mandrake seems to be hiding their system configuration tools now, too. They're good tools, they're just hard to find.

gcc 3.1 got in cooker some time ago.

[KeyserDK]

It was one of the first thing mdk did in cooker after the 8.2 mdk release :=). So it's been there for a while. They did this after redhat made the move in their dev distro (rawhide ?).

Beware that some mozilla plugins do NOT work just as stated above, when mozilla is compiled with gcc 3.1. There is an workaround (in mozilla) for flash. Realplayer just got fixed today in cooker so you need to update for that to work too. Java doesnt work :/. Bug sun for that to happen i guess.

Other noteworthy stuff is gnome2 & gstreamer. Gnome is just awesome, especially with the new windowmanager metacity. Nautilus2 actually has the speed now (this is on a sub 1gz machine), but it lacks in functionality :( (list view works bad).

Gstreamer is only at the 0.4 (alpha stuff) so it does break some times. But i really think this is going to be The Next Big Thing after all the 1.0 releases such as evolution, abiword, mozilla,gnumeric and openoffice.

BIG install!

[verloren]

From the linked page:

"Of course you will find the latest & greatest versions of the main packages, including:

kernel 2.4.19 RC1
*
XFree86 4.2, which supports many video cards previously only supported in 3.3.6
glibc 2.2.5..."

The Kernel, XFree etc. are cool, but it also includes * Not even limited to *.rpm! That's a *seriously big* installation!

Why gcc 3.1 ?

[unixmaster]

Save that I dont use Mandrake and still love my Slack but its nice that Drake guys used gcc 3.1 . Why ?

Benchmarks ( http://www.coyotegulch.com/reviews/intel_comp/inte l_gcc_bench2.html ) showed that gcc 3.1 produces killer c++ code as intel's compiler and msvc++.

C++ code was a bottleneck for gcc 2.9x series thats why our pretty Mozilla is slower than its is on Windows. But with gcc 3.1 and upcoming gcc releases this is no true anymore. After this we will have killer c++ code . So this means faster kde & mozilla etc etc.

And gcc 3.1 is more ANSI/ISO C++ compliant see http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.1/changes.html

Re:11:11

[Anonymous Coward]

I read this reply at 11:34 exactly. Creepy.

Official Press Release

[Anonymous Coward]

"A new version of Mandrake Linux was released today, much to the celebration of the unprofessional amateur cocksmokers for whom Linux is an excuse to avoid real work. This distribution includes more of the latest hacked-together, half-functional drivers that are the hallmark of Linux, but luckily enough of the current generation of hardware is unsupported that Linux users still have plenty of excuses not to get any work done. 'At first, I was worried that my new Dell computer would work right of the box,' says Harry Twinkfucher, a longtime Mandrake fan. 'Luckily, my video card and SCSI card were just as broken as GCC 3.1, so it'll be at least another three months before my employer discovers that I am unskilled, unintelligent, and unemployable.'

"Linux, an operating system so backward that just getting it installed is a challenge for many, has been one of the homosexual world's most popular time-wasters ever since Linus Torvalds decided to make an obsolete copy of the popular UNIX system for his 386 PC in 1991. Today, thousands of wannabes are successfully using Linux to hide their inadequacies.

"But what's next for Linux? Many think that Linux's many Windows-ripoff window managers will be the focus of the next wave of uneducated keyboard-banging. Miguel de Icazza, a wetback trained in the art of Visual Basic, is already hard at work on Mono, a revolutionary development framework that is both incompatible with existing Open-Source software and decades behind the .NET framework that its architechture was stolen from. Mono promises to set the Linux community back even further, perhaps even acheiving the Linux goal of creating a truly broken system on which it is impossible to do any real work."

Mandrkae is for newbs

[xchino]

Mandrake is for windows users to try out linux so they can say it sucks, because they tried a user friendly linux distro and still couldn't get it to do anything.

I guess if you can't point and click a button and have everything done for you, you can't use Linux.

Does anyone know why that page crashes IE?

[MemeRot]

The source code is:

So to begin with it is emphatically NOT a valid html file as it claims to be, and IE shouldn't be expected to support it. But I'm not sure what's making IE crash. Just the fact that it's a made up class?

Woops, should have previewed

[MemeRot]

object ID="dosIE-doe"
CLASSID="CLSID:00022613-0000-0000-C000-000000000 04 6"> /object

Damn, can't force the html to be visible with code or blockquote wrappers without breaking the object tags.

netbsd 1.5.3 posted in-section

[timothy]

It was posted here:

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/07/22/2327 21 5

Front page vs. sectional, eh, everyone has different priorites and preferences, and everyone complains no matter what happens :)

timothy

Incompatible

[Anonymous Coward]

is compiled with gcc-3.1, which (alas) makes it incompatible with a fair amount of commercial software.

technically or ideologically?

~~~

why does GCC 3.1 break stuff?

[Ender Ryan]

Hmmm... I don't understand why compiling things with GCC 3.1 breaks commercial programs. Is it due to incorrect versions of the libstdc++.* libs? If that is the case why not ship the distribution with both compilers installed?

Currently I have about half the stuff on my system compiled with gcc 3.1 and have not had a problem.

Someone who knows more about this please explain.

Re:why does GCC 3.1 break stuff?

[uhoreg]

The C++ ABI changed. So only C++ programs will break. C stuff should work fine. It's not really a matter of shipping with two compilers -- C++ programs compiled with one compiler will not be able to use C++ libraries compiled with another.

Re:why does GCC 3.1 break stuff?

[glwtta]

the way I understand it, it's more often than not because of incorrect syntax - gcc 2.9.x was a lot more relaxed about these things, and let through a lot of code that 3.x doesn't. there's also probably some bugs as well, it's .1 not .9 after all...

Re:why does GCC 3.1 break stuff?

[elflord]

Hmmm... I don't understand why compiling things with GCC 3.1 breaks commercial programs. Is it due to incorrect versions of the libstdc++.* libs? If that is the case why not ship the distribution with both compilers installed?

Currently I have about half the stuff on my system compiled with gcc 3.1 and have not had a problem.

The submitter doesn't have a very good grasp of the issues. The compatibility issue is that gcc 3.1 uses a different ABI to older gcc versions. That is, C++ functions need to have their names "mangled" to handle C++ features such as function overloading, namespaces, and templates; and the name mangling scheme changes from compiler to compiler (largely because they're still trying to get it right) This means that C++ programs compiled with older compilers will not be able to link against C++ libraries (such as libstdc++) compiled with gcc 3.1. In practice, this is not a problem-- most commerical applications don't dynamically link against any C++ libraries except libstdc++, and Linux distributions typically ship multiple libstdc++ versions. The libstdc++ that ships with gcc 3.1 has the soname (the name that the runtime linker cares about) "libstdc++.so.4" by default, so it will not collide with older versions of the same library (which are named differently)

Wireless?

[NetJunkie]

Anyone have automatic setup for wireless NICs yet? I want to put Linux on my T23 Thinkpad but I don't want to deal with setting that up.

Re:Wireless?

[SomeOtherGuy]

I always have to add a line or 2 in hardware profile in the pcmcia config section to get the kernal to properly load the (airo) module for my cisco wireless card....(no matter how new the distribution). Kind of a catch22 when trying to do an FTP install. I would be really suprised if this is still not the case with Mandrake 9.

Re:Wireless?

[fcrozat]

Of course, if you were reporting those problems on cooker mailing list, it might be corrected for Mandrake 9.0 final..

--
Frédéric Crozat
MandrakeSoft

Re:Wireless?

[shelby289]

It worked right after first boot on my Thinkpad 600E. I am running version 8.2 of mandrake and a US Robotices wireless card I bought from Tiger Direct for around $40.00. Good luck.

Ouch! This is gonna hurt...

[Eric Damron]

I always look forward to seeing what the good folk at Mandrake have been doing. Version 8.2 has really been exceptional.

However, breaking all of my commercial apps is going to cost me big bucks so I may not be upgrading any time soon. :-(

Is there a list out there of commercial apps that will break (or won't)?

former mandrake user

[RestiffBard]

I have to say Mandrake has to be the releasenest (new word) distro there is. I think because of that I'm now giving debian a go for the first time in about 8 years. apt-get is just a frickin dream. now I know why everyone always raves about it.

Re:former mandrake user

[glwtta]

i'll see your apt-get, and I'll raise you an emerge :) I haven't been able to stop raving about it since getting Gentoo a few days ago. "emerge kde" on base system - come back 8 hours later, it's done (including XFree)

Re:former mandrake user

[RestiffBard]

ok, my curiosity is definetly piqued by gentoo. I admit that. but I've never been able to figure out how I install it with just a 56k modem. admittedly I've never tried very hard.

Re:former mandrake user

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm on Mandrake and am about to go to Debian woody, I'm curious about Gentoo but a little uncertain how easy is to do and whether I can cope with stuff that doesnt have a portege(?) package for it. dunno.

Re:former mandrake user

[glwtta]

but I've never been able to figure out how I install it with just a 56k modem

slowly. you can use the stage3 tarballs during install to save yourself a few hours download time, so you can get a working system, without X or any of that good stuff. it's really not a distro you want to be running without a real internet connection

Issues

[Niscenus]

In 1998, Mandrake's GNU/Linux OS (6.0, was it?) gave you an option between the last X3 and the still in development X4...in the age of X6.6, why is MandrakeSoft (a subsidiary partner of Macmillian Software, which never ported its cool games to GNU/Linux systems, those bastards) still offering only 4?

Series 5 is fully developed, so, where the schmeck is it?

Re:Issues

[Junta]

What you are referring to is XFree86 4.2.0, which has the foundation of X11R6.6, so be happy.

Loki games?

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh-oh...but I should still be able to use my Loki games, right?

LDD tell me that myth 2 for example are linked against:

libX11.so.6
libXext.so.6
libpthread.so.0
libdl.so.2
libm.so.6
libc.so.6
ld-linux.so.2

No C++ libraries... Does that mean that it's safe to assume that myth2 will work then?

So???

[Andy Dodd]

He's talking about Kai's PhotoSoap, which is a closed-source Windows-only application. Issues with Windows GCC are irrelevant to such an application, since you can't recompile your system libraries. More to the point, issues with Linux GCC are even less irrelevant - What does a Linux GCC problem have to do with PhotoSoap, which doesn't run under Linux no matter what GCC you have? (Exception being WINE, but since that implements the windows ABI itself, recompiling that under GCC 3.1 should be all you need to fix all your WINE apps.)

Slapped together desktops

[DrXym]

I hope Mandrake are paying better attention to usability than they have in the past. The default GNOME / KDE desktops in 8.2 were simply atrocious which is one of the reasons I jumped ship back to Red Hat. A generic desktop slapped together with some godawful homegrown config tools makes for a lousy user experience. I wonder how the walmart crowd will cope!

Perhaps money is the issue, but since I got an email from them today saying they'll be profitable by the end of the year I hope they devote some serious attention to it.

That's funny. . .

[kfg]

I switched my business to Linux some years ago because I got tired of MS breaking my mission critical apps, and forcing me to pay for the priviledge in the process.

KFG

Re:That's funny. . .

[HiThere]

Well, if your applications are in source code, you should be safe. And if they are statically linked, you should be safe.

As for the rest...
I'm thinking of keeping a system at gcc 2.9x until I get tired of CivCTP and Alpha Centuarii. This may not be necessary, but I do remember that one day SimCity2000 stopped working, and I never knew just when.

I don't think there's any way short of keeping an un-upgraded machine around. (Or keeping a current version of VMWare, but that's basically the same answer.)

You're such a troll.

[bgarcia]

Short answer: the gcc crew is lazy, inconsiderate, or both.

Or, you're lazy, inconsiderate, and trolling.

The C++ ABI keeps changing because they are fixing bugs in the current compiler and C++ Standard Library.

You can look up the reasons for the compiler-side ABI changes here

The GNU implementation of the Standard C++ Library has been woefully uncompliant until work was begun on the 3.x version of the library (which was first included in the 3.X versions of the compiler and RedHat's 2.96 version of the compiler).

So, the real reason why they keep breaking binary compatibility (and it's usually only C++ compatibility) is that they are NOT lazy, but working VERY HARD to create a standards-compliant compiler and library.

Re:You're such a troll.

[Arandir]

I'm not trolling, I'm just venting my frustrations. There is a difference.

The GCC team made the decision to finalize the C++ standard in a *stable* branch. This was a bad decision. They should be creating a standards compliant compiler and library in an unstable branch. Changing the ABI between minor versions is a bad thing.

I'm just hoping that GNU can get their act together by the time 4.0 comes out.

Re:You're such a troll.

[elflord]

The GCC team made the decision to finalize the C++ standard in a *stable* branch. This was a bad decision. They should be creating a standards compliant compiler and library in an unstable branch.

??? There is a "stable" branch with a fixed ABI, there are lots of them. 3.0.4 is the latest maintenance release of 3.0. And gcc 3.1 will have 3.1.1 as a maintenance release. If they did stagnate and not implement any changes that would break the ABI (which would have amounted to keeping a very broken standard library), others would have forked (Redhat forked anyway, with distributors using the forked version because they didn't release a new compiler quickly enough for Redhat)

Changing the ABI between minor versions is a bad thing.

What do you call a "minor version" ? Look at the duration between the point releases. They are "minor" only in the sense that the second most significant digit has changed.

Re:You're such a troll.

[Arandir]

What do you call a "minor version" ?

x.y.z. Any version change that does not increment x is a minor version change. That may not be how GCC does its versioning, but it's the way that most Free Software projects do it.

Re:You're such a troll.

[bgarcia]

If you had bothered yourself to look into gcc's history, you would have found that, given a version of x.y.z, if x or y changes, then they have broken binary compatibility, probably even in C programs.

This is not a recent change in gcc development philosophy. It has always been this way. It doesn't matter what you think "most Free Software projects" do. This is how gcc has ALWAYS done their versioning. And gcc development predates most of your other "free software" projects.

You may call your trolling "venting", but so far the problems you have described are due to your own ignorance.

Go learn something about gcc development before complaining about it. Gcc may not be perfect, but 3.1 is one of the most standards-compliant C++ compilers available today, and it's due to the hard work and dedication of those currently working on it.

Re:You're such a troll.

[Arandir]

You may call your trolling "venting", but so far the problems you have described are due to your own ignorance.

You're absolutely right. I should be ashamed for wanting a stable ABI.

Re:You're such a troll.

[elflord]

You're absolutely right. I should be ashamed for wanting a stable ABI.

There's no shame in wanting a stable ABI. What is truly shameful is your ignorant ranting. Everyone wants a stable ABI, but there are bugs that need to be fixed for the ABI to stabilise, and in the interim states (where there are outstanding bugs or non-implemented parts of the standard), you have a choice between stagnation and breaking compatibility from time to time.

So your complaint really boils down to the fact that you don't feel the gcc project has moved fast enough, but the simple fact of the matter is that it is doing quite well compared to competing compilers in terms of support for ANSI/ISO C++.

Re:You're such a troll.

[bgarcia]

I should be ashamed for wanting a stable ABI.

If you want a stable ABI, then stop upgrading. Sheesh. It's not that freaking hard to figure out, is it?

Now for those of us who prefer a standard-compliant compiler, we can keep upgrading.

The problem is, you want both, and for some reason you can't beat it into your thick skull that development of a compiler is a VERY HARD THING and it takes lots of TIME to get it right.

No, you'd rather just bitch and moan that the developers are lazy, incompetant dumbasses. I bet you could code up a completely standards-compliant, multi-platform, multi-language, optimizing compiler in no time at all, eh?

If you want to admit you were just frustrated at the current state of things and allowed your frustration to turn into that boneheaded rant, then fine. But don't try to excuse your behavior by stating that you "just want" something.

Does this mean my loki games won't worK???

[Anonymous Butthead]

does it???
Man, this would suck if it did...

Re:Does this mean my loki games won't worK???

[Neph]

Loki's Alpha Centauri shipped with two versions of the binaries, eg smacx and smacx.dynamic. The former is statically linked and doesn't depend on any shared libraries or installed compilers, only on the executable format. So as long as Linux supports the ELF format the non-dynamic version of Alpha Centauri will run.

I would assume that they did the same for other games, but don't know for sure. It might be more difficult for 3d games; would it be possible to link against a "universal" OpenGL lib?

Re:Does this mean my loki games won't worK???

[Anonymous Butthead]

hmmm, looksl ike my loki game will work then, great job loki!, but vmware.... and woflenstein..... and q3.... and uplink, oh the agony! (looks like i won't be upgrading anytime soon...)

Re:Does this mean my loki games won't worK???

[RKloti]

NO... Since binary incompatibility only affects *C++ programs* and AFAIK all of Loki's games are compiled with something else (C?).

Re:Does this mean my loki games won't worK???

[Junta]

quake3 works fine with gcc3.1, trust me :)... dunno about the rest..

Re:Does this mean my loki games won't worK???

[Rieger]

I have a gentoo gcc3.1 system and SOF, Heretic SIMCITY3000 Loki demos running

Re:Does this mean my loki games won't worK???

[RupW]

Since binary incompatibility only affects *C++ programs*

In practical terms, it only affects programs that load dynamic libraries with C++ interfaces. As long as you stick to C-interfaced libraries and you have the correct version of libstdc++ around (which is pretty much tied to a version of g++ so will have the right ABI pretty much automatically) then you should be OK. In the worst case, you just need a separate copy of the libraries built with an old GCC and a wrapper script to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH.

Java compiled to native with gcj may also break since its runtime is built with g++.

awww man.

[SCHecklerX]

I just downloaded 8.2 for my tosh libretto. *sigh*

Is Diskdrake any better?

[SCHecklerX]

I recently installed Mandrake 8.2 on my toshiba libretto. For those of you who do not know, the libretto's hibernate feature is bios controlled. Being an old bios, it doesn't understand anything bigger than an 8.4GB drive. This is a problem, since I have a 20GB in mine (Mmmm...portable jukebox!). What happens is the machine will dump its hibernation info right in the middle of the drive.

Anyway...The solution is not too hard. You leave a blank partition where needed, and then span it with an LVM.

The problem is that DiskDrake does not allow you to type in specific values for start/end sectors when partitioning. You have to use their slider bars. This means holding down your mouse button for an hour or so to get to the right spot, or just getting 'close enough' and wasting a couple hundred meg of space. I went for the latter, and am not too happy with it.

So, do they allow you to fine-tune your partitions yet?

Another issue I'm having is when logging in as a normal user, there is a long pause, as modprobe is called for some reason (doesn't happen with root login). Does anybody know what this is and how to fix it?

Re:Is Diskdrake any better?

[BumbaCLot]

Try the arrow keys next time. I thought all Linux users knew how to use a keyboard....

Re:Is Diskdrake any better?

[jonadab]

> The problem is that DiskDrake does not allow you to type
> in specific values for start/end sectors when partitioning.
> You have to use their slider bars. This means holding down
> your mouse button for an hour or so to get to the right spot,
> or just getting 'close enough' and wasting a couple hundred
> meg of space. I went for the latter, and am not too happy
> with it. So, do they allow you to fine-tune your partitions
> yet?

I believe the new release includes an innovative DiskDrake
alternative that handles this situation very nicely, allowing
you to specify every detail about your partitions. I think
it's called fdisk or something like that.

Re:Is Diskdrake any better?

[SCHecklerX]

Did you even bother reading my post? Try holding down the arrow keys on a 20 GB disk using diskdrake to get to where you want. Here's a hint...it goes one sector at a time. Only 512K/sector. You'll be holding that key an awefully long time to get to the 8.45GB point required for the partition needed.

Re:If you are interested in purchasing this CD-r s

[Anonymous Coward]

'Open Soars'? That's sick.

Re:Where's the love? --- Thanks

[SomeOtherGuy]

Hey -- I will remember that line of thinking to use as argument when my wife complains about not having a new car...."But dear -- the 1987 Mazda 626 is about as stable as an automobile as you will ever find, these new fangled cars are just to buggy"

FreeBSD runs linux binaries better than linux kern

[Anonymous Coward]

It is a little know fact that FreeBSD runs linux binaries better than linux kernels do. And, FreeBSD does not break binary compatability between releases like linux kernels do. Isn't it time you looked into the more stable higher performance FreeBSD operating system?

GCC 3.1

[Junta]

I've been running gcc 3.1 compiled gentoo for a while now. Very nice and offers some tangible speedups. However, the costs:

Browser Plugins:
Flash plugin required me to write a small compatibility library to mimick some the old libstdc++ mangled memory allocation schemes. This will probably not appear in a Mandrake desktop, as they will likely provide a -compat library without the user knowing.
Never have gotten java plugins to work... Just haven't figured it out for blackdown, ibm's, nor suns.... Realplayer plugin problem same as Flash. Right now I am just lacking java...

Build:
Some programs won't build out of the box. Some due to bad code, but mostly due to strange build configuration. For example, basiliskII's build fails at one point when gcc is used to link object files generated by g++ and bombs because some g++ symbols are unknown to gcc, switching that gcc to g++ makes that step go by... Others I've had issues with include PixiePlus, mame, and openoffice.

Others may have issues. I don't use crossover as vanilla wine fills all my needs, and I have nothing in the way of commercial software aside from games, which all *worked*, (every quake, civctp). The biggest problem I've had is again, c++ browser plugins...

weekend stories

[timothy]

I'm sure you're right about the reason so many people didn't notice that story. Rather than a "weekend updates" (simple reasons -- I think that would be too self-referential, too thin, and extra work :)), what might be a nice option is to turn on a list of say the last 5 stories in the same topic / section to appear beneath the current story.

(So a story under Articles / Debian would show the last 5 articles also posted under Articles / Debian .)

However, if you have a particular implementation idea in mind, note that discussing it here and with me is next to useless: visit Sourceforge and file a feature request :)

Cheers,

timothy

Re: They're trying, but they keep fixing things

[Szplug]

And, in libstdc++ there're things like how to implement strings, what to inline or not, that they want to change. However, it would seem to make sense to wait for 3.2, which should be a stable ABI for the indefinite future, and will appear shortly after 3.1.1, see: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-07/msg00596.html

inflation

[den_erpel]

Well in times of troubled markets it was bound to happen:
SuSE will release version 9.0 in a month
Redhat, noticing it is being encircled, decides to skip versions 8 and 9 all together and releases their version 10.0 (a beta of course) and pushes Linus to release the 2.6.0 kernel (if not, they'll make their own branch).

Debian is still concerned about some open bugs and decides to call the release of 3.0 premature. The next version is not to be released within the next decade.

Re:inflation

[deno]

Don't you know that marketing folks generally can't count over 9? Even Apple folks had to be forced into counting in roman numbers before givin up...

So, you either shot all marketing folks, or find a way to avoid numbers bigger than 9.x.

Suse already solved this problem by starting the distribution name change. So, there will be "Suse 9.x" and "United linux 1.x", and then they'll gratiously drop the Suse 10 distro in favor of "United Linux" 1.x+1 or 2.x. Wonder how Mandrake will solve this problem? ;-)

whiney linux

[Anonymous Coward]

'nothing' works w/3.1, 'cos no-one has to support it. Now they have to.
Sounds like a bunch of win users in here, "...my hardware isn't supported in XP!"; "why do you have XP then?"; "Oh, just because."; "but you say nothing works w/XP?"; "Yeah, it really pisses me off, what am I going to do, I can't go back - that would be downgrading..."

Re:If you are interested in purchasing this CD-r s

[pheph]

Open Sores. _That's_ sick. :)

gcc 3.1 and matlab?

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone tried running matlab on a 3.1 system? I would really like to know if this app is broken.

If it is I may be stuck with my current distro for a while, I don't really feel like spending a million dollars on a new copy of matlab because of a compiler problem.

Microsoft

[kitzilla]

You know, if it were Microsoft breaking Java. we'd scream bloody murder.

Oh: they did? Never mind...

Try Debian

[Jagasian]

Debian Linux doesn't break huge numbers of apps with releases. Maybe you are just using the wrong Linux? You sound like you want a conservative Linux, and therefore Debian is for you.

Re:Try Debian

[fmaxwell]

Maybe you are just using the wrong Linux?

Great. Now we add different distros into the mix. The average consumer will never have Linux as a desktop OS until he can go into a store, buy a program on CD, put the CD into the tray, and have an automated install walk him through putting it on his system. When he upgrades his OS, the application needs to keep running, not be recompiled, scrapped, or replaced. Vendors need to be able to direct the user to click things and type things to provide support. They can't deal with every distro being different. It drives support costs, and consumer frustration, through the roof.

Re:Try Debian

[aardvarkjoe]

It sounds to me like you're rooting for the wrong operating system. If having only one distribution is the only way to make Linux 'succeed', then it's never going to be anything but a failure.

If, on the other hand, (1) Linux is not solely aimed at the "average consumer," or (2) the "average consumer" is capable of learning to use something that's different (not harder; different), then it (or something like it) will succeed. And it won't have to be a Windows clone.

Re:Try Debian

[fmaxwell]

If having only one distribution is the only way to make Linux 'succeed', then it's never going to be anything but a failure.

Having multiple compatible distributions is fine, but I should be able to download a program for "Linux" without worrying about what kernel I'm running, what windows manager, what distribution, etc.

or (2) the "average consumer" is capable of learning to use something that's different (not harder; different)

Linux is "harder". That point was driven home to me as I tried to find where Mandrake 8.2 hid the app to change the IP address of the network card (please, oh holier-than-thou Linux geeks, don't try to impress me with your arcane memorization of command line utilities and switches to do same). Take a look at Microsoft's "Control Panel." Nicely thought out. It may not be perfect, but it's a lot better than the seemingly random arrangement of system setup stuff under popular Linux distros.

Re:Try Debian

[aardvarkjoe]

Most distributions are "compatible". I download programs all the time without worrying about kernel version, window manager, or anything else -- only very occasionally do I find things that don't work immediately. It really doesn't seem any worse than under Windows. Most "commercial" programs claim to work under "Red Hat such and such", or something of the sort, only because that's what they've tested. But if you think that the amount of incompatibility we have now dooms Linux to failure, jump ship now. You're never going to change the fact that users of Linux have different ideas and preferences for how things should work.

As far as the control panel goes -- although I don't use them, I *know* that many distributions come with a configuration program to handle that kind of stuff. If you think it's easy to find on Windows, it's just because you've been using it so long. When I end up having to use a Windows system, it always involves long periods of searching through ambiguously-named icons, tabs, and menus to find the options I want -- assuming that it's there at all.

It's not harder. It's just different.

Re:Try Debian

[be-fan]

(2) the "average consumer" is capable of learning to use something that's different (not harder; different), then it (or something like it) will succeed. And it won't have to be a Windows clone.
>>>>>>>
I entirely agree with you. I'd bet good money that the majority of the populace would love to just be able to type apt-get dist-upgrade (or emerge -u world) and have all their apps automatically upgraded.

Re:If you are interested in purchasing this CD-r s

[Compuser]

I would have bought but you route all
payments through PayPal. Do get a regular
credit card processing option, else you'll
lose some customers, like myself.

Switch to a shell ....

[Anonymous Coward]

During the install switch to a shell and use fdisk to manually partition your system, then switch back to the gui install and continue on.

Re:If you are interested in purchasing this CD-r s

[pheph]

We are in serious talks with credit card processors in getting a merchant account and plan to have a new system in place within the next couple weeks. Very sorry it didn't work out...

Compatibility

[Drogo Knotwise]

Will this release have the GF4 drivers, or will you still have to install a GF4 after the Linux install?

Re:Compatibility

[Anonymous Coward]

GF4 support probably won't be included out-of-the-box until XFree86 4.3.

Re:If you are interested in purchasing this CD-r s

[Anonymous Coward]

This makes me wonder where my $30 or so I used to purchas my distro in Best Buy went. Anybody know how much went to Mandrake, and how much was lost to Best Buy and others?

You need broadband for Apt-Get or urpmi

[Abreu]

gratch# apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade ...is much easier. Even if you have a slow connection; just walk away. It'll finish eventually. I think urpmi will do much the same thing for Mandrake.

Sure... in a couple of months!
mutter...Gentoo kids...mutter...spoiled by broadband...mutter

You know, I would very much rather use my computer in the meantime, and I would rather spend 8 USD to get a copy of the latest Mandrake disks from the local computer flea market than to put my modem to apt-get anything.

Re:You need broadband for Apt-Get or urpmi

[swillden]

Nahh, I used Debian unstable on a dialup for a several months. Note that unstable gets *lots* of updates. Testing is nearly as up to date without but with a much lower volume of updates. I ran upgrade every night, and it was a rare night that it didn't finish by morning. When it didn't, no problem, I just killed it and let it finish the next night. I mean, dialup isn't really *that* slow. At 4KB per second, you can download 115MB in an 8-hour stretch. That's a very *large* update.

Also, with Debian at least, there is absolutely nothing preventing you from using your machine while it's downloading. Or even while it's upgrading, for that matter.

However, I did make the mistake of updating over dialup from a hotel room, once (I run unstable on my laptop). I hadn't realized that the hotel had per-minute charges on local calls after the first hour. Ouch!

P.S. Thanks for calling me a kid! I don't hear that much anymore ;-)

Is gcc3.0 compatible with gcc3.1?

[r6144]

I once used gcc3.0, but now I use 2.96 and 3.1. I heard that 2.96 (redhat newest) is mostly (c++) compatible with 2.95.x, and 3.0 is mostly c++ compatible with 3.1. Is that true?

Re:Is gcc3.0 compatible with gcc3.1?

[Bollie]

As a general rule only dot releases keep C++ ABI compatibility. C compatibility is now generally regarded as stable. One of the main goals for GCC 3.0 was a stable C++ ABI, but it seems we'll have to wait for at least GCC 3.3 for that ;-)

So, to sum up, 2.95.*, "2.96", 3.0.*, 3.1.* and 3.2.* will have issues if you want to link one's code to the other using C++. Also, 2.96 can't really peacefully co-exist with 2.95 because of library name conflicts...

But hey, source distributions don't have that problem! Well-written source code
generally compiles on any one of the three... besides you can always go back to assembly...

Re:If you are interested in purchasing this CD-r s

[pheph]

If you need justification, just think that somewhere, someone will notice that boxed set sales of Mandrake were up this month, and they should stock more. :)

ebuild??

[Anonymous Coward]

If and when I get broadband, I'm thinking of running gentoo. Has anyone made an effort to make an ebuild of this procedure?

Also, are you guys liasing with the blackdown team on 1.4?

65 MB

[Anonymous Coward]

In order to get 65MB, choose minimal install without X.

Obviously not very useful for desktop install, but can be a nice starting point for self-made servers. FYI, this "65MB install" is more than just an excercise to show "we can do it": it's what actually gets used as a basis for our firewall distro.

interesting definition of "incompatible".

[deno]

Both RH and Mandrake used this compiler, and between the two of them these distros hold >50% of the world Linux market - no matter how you define "linux market" in the first place.

So, you have two major players who are incompatible with.. what exactly? ;-)

Re:interesting definition of "incompatible".

[Anonymous Coward]

UnitedLinux /me runs

woah there

[FireBook]

woah there- whilst i agree with you that theres no reason to insult people in a semi troll- for most of us 'joe users' out here app compatability between ms oses is not really too much of an issue- to be honest no more (or less) of an issue as the gcc issue that this thread was originally about before the flames started flying. the issue that nt couldnt run games was long known about and was something to do with the direct x issue with nt- other than that i know 95% of apps will work on any ms platform (assuming they are not designed to use features in the newer (or older) oses or are apps designed to fix or maintain parts of newer or older oses (ie ntfs disk defragmenting app)

Re:woah there

[Sleepy]

Yeah, sorry about that FireBook... There was no need for me to clutter up the messageboard by slamming him.

I don't like people like ceejayoz, who has to elevate his ego with a completely unprovoked attack on nathanh's post. I should be more tolerant... ceejayoz is in all likelyhood, just an angry kid. ;-)

thanks

[Ender Ryan]

Thanks for the explanation. So, I assume that once they "get it right", they won't change the ABI anymore, or not often anyway.

Re:thanks

[elflord]

Thanks for the explanation. So, I assume that once they "get it right", they won't change the ABI anymore, or not often anyway.

That's correct. Once they have it right, they can freeze the ABI, and they're hoping that 3.2 will be the release where they get it right. They may have to change the standard library, but the changes will not probably not affect binary comptibility (because the streams library is stable, and the other part of the standard library, STL, is a source-only library)

Good Point but Your Example Sucks

[FreeUser]

Proprietary Software != Commercial Software

It's proprietary software (regardless of being commercial or not -- realplayer is proprietary but free of charge) that will not work. This is due to the usual bad support that proprietary software vendors inflict upon the consumers.

Your example is flawed (Real is commercial software, even if it is distributed gratis. It is an example of both commercial and proprietary software) but your point is spot on.

Freeware that is distributed in binary only format (such as was often the case under DOS and Windoze) with no source availability (and no license to look at it) is proprietary even though it is not commercial.

Likewise, some commercial software, such as QT, is not proprietary at all (QT is licensed under a commercial license, the QPL, and the GPL, with the end user having their choice of which license to use the software under).

You are absolutely correct, the two terms, commercial v. proprietary, are completely orthogonal to one another.

Please don't ship with 3.1

[Per Abrahamsen]

There are a couple of small ABI bugs in 3.1. After advice from the Red Hat, SUSE, Debian, and FreeBSD teams, the GCC steering committe has decided to release a 3.2 with just the ABI bug fixes, but no new features. The hope is that vendors will standardize on 3.2 for cross-distribution compatibility, and ignore 3.1.

The GCC developers are obviously embarased that ABI bugs was found after 3.0 was releases.

I do, and I like many of them.

[croanon]

Java rocks! I like it. You may not, its your choice.