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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[JonOnSlashdot]

i see the number 4:20 alot...

Re:Compiled with gcc-3.1

[mickwd]

Great news. Thanks.

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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[nathanh]

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

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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[extrasolar]

Who runs java apps, anyway?

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

[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

[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

[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

[Cyclops]

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

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

[swillden]

Still trying to get that first job, huh?

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

[BigBir3d]

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

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

[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

[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

[autocracy]

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

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.

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.

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?

[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?

[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.

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

[*xpenguin*]

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

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

[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: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.

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?

[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.

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.

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".

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.

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

[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

[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

[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

[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...

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.

[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

[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.

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.

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

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.

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: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?

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

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: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: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.

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)

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!

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: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.

Re:They always have been incompatible

[haystd]

Two sides to every argument:

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

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: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: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.

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.

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

[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

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.)

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!

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.

[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.

awww man.

[SCHecklerX]

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

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.

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?

[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: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:Issues

[Junta]

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

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"

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...

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

[pheph]

Open Sores. _That's_ sick. :)

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

[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

[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.

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...

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

[Junta]

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

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 ;-)

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

.

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. :)

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: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.

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? ;-)

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.

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: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. ;-)

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.