Slashdot Mirror
Libranet 2.7 Released
Jon wrote in with news that Libranet 2.7 has been released. I've never tried Libranet, but Debian 3.0 is a fine, up-to-date OS with the usual Debian installation (harder than necessary), so if Libranet offers that Debian goodness with a better installer it should be an excellent choice for both experienced and newbie users.
Anyone remember Progeny Debian? I grew somewhat fond of that distro, too bad nothing became of it.
Storm, another promising Debian based distro that I was sad to see fade away.
I tried the beta in an effort to find a distribution that I would be comfortable with. The install goes rather well, and the distribution uses the awesome apt-get package management system. The only reason I didn't keep it around is because I was trying other distros. Libranet is pretty clean compared to some of the others I have tried, and I'm a complete newbie... Go figure.
"What kind of chip you got in there, a Dorito?" - Weird Al Yankovic
I've been using the Libranet 2.0 Essentials free .iso download for about a month now. Libranet is great!
It features scripts for recompiling the kernel (works) and installing NVidia drivers (almost worked, but was easy to fix and has since been updated).
It's much faster than SuSE 7.2 was on the same machine, even making KDE fun to use. And that was before the kernel recompile.
Oh, and did I mention hardware autodetection?
Their "XAdminmenu" is worth having, too, and I understand 2.7 has improvements.
Seriously, go get this!
You can download it at the linuxiso site.
http://www.linuxiso.org/distro.php?distro=31
Considering this is basically Debain 3.0 along with KDE 3, Gnome 2 and OpenOffice, then isn't this just a Woody CD along with an extra's CD, with a better installer?
Talking of which, when I last installed Woody, it took about 5 - 10 minutes, and was the simplest installer I have used to install a linux distro for a while. I dont know what all the gripe is about Debians installer. As long as you can handle selecting what packages you want, and install a module for your network card (and if you can't do this, why are you running linux?) then I do not believe the Debian installer is a very hard installer to use.
All of this is coming from a Slackware user from way back.
sounds like a research paper database. better check the IP and copyrights...... nah, i'll just sue them now.
MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
Version 2.7 of libranet is not free , they will not offer it for free either. They say in the message boards that it si because not enough people buy it. They also say that they want 100,000 users in 3 months. Nice 5 million dollar income from a debian rip off Hopefully they will make a free version but until then you have to download version 2.0
haha
I have the feeling that there is going to be a lot of anti-libranet commentary on this, but I have to say that I love it greatly.
I have been running it for 3 weeks without any problem.
The Pros:
-Great Control Panel, itll even recompile your kernel for you. I tried it, does a good job
-Install sets up your CD burner!
-A heck of a lot of packages on one cd
-even at 2.0 (what, did they skip a couple numbers =P) it came with really current packages
Cons:
-Old KDE and Gnome
Libranet has the ease of SUSE with the power of debian.
I have gotten 3 people on linux using libra.
I'm definitely staying with it (and I've tried out SuSe, RH, Mandrake, Slack, and Debian)
forget it.
I've said this before. The Debian installation just isn't that hard. I'd like to hear some specific points about what makes it difficult other than that it isn't X based, but rather console based.
What I don't think is stressed often enough is that you only need to install Debian ONCE. I'm running it on several machines (home/business) and I haven't even had to reboot to upgrade.
apt-get dist-upgrade
Love it, love it, love it.
My Karma was at 49, then they switched to words. All that work for nothing!
Also for a good bit of information of what Libranet has check out this
Hmm...sounds like they started by trying to make some Canadian backbacon, eh?
Couldn't find any beer on their website, though...
Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
Where did you get 2.6 ? they dont offer it anywhere. Only 2.0 and 2.7
haha
Don't you mean Corel Linux?
.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
> I've said this before. The Debian installation just isn't that hard. I'd like to hear some specific points about what makes it difficult other than that it isn't X based, but rather console based.
It asks the user for specific hardware modules to be used; most people don't know their NIC/audio/video chipsets offhand, and don't really want to. Modern Linux installers don't ask for such details, they figure it out for themselves and do the right things. Console/GUI is less important than the "what hardware module should I use? You tell me!" questions.
> What I don't think is stressed often enough is that you only need to install Debian ONCE. I'm running it on several machines (home/business) and I haven't even had to reboot to upgrade.
What's also not stressed often enough is that *any* OS install is a new-to-the-OS user's first impression. If that first impression goes well, there is a larger tolerance for whatever minor quirks occur later on - a larger well of goodwill available when problems crop up. If the install was a strain, then later problems may well cause a newbie to just give up, as they won't want to keep on having to be Such An Expert just to use a frickin' computer. Modern OSs also understand this.
The default Debian install, since it's designed to handle all sorts of uses of the OS, just installs the base. Your average user wants other stuff -- X11 for example -- that it doesn't install by default. Not sure if this has changed, but when I installed Debian I had to manually install X11 by using dselect after the base install finished. And dselect is not the most user-friendly tool. It also took me a long time to get fonts to look decent (by carefully perusing the Linux Font Deuglification HOWTO), but that may be more a Linux/X problem than a Debian one. Setting up my CD burner was also a bit annoying -- I had to mess with modconf to load the ide-scsi module and pass ignore=hdc to the ide-cd module. Not too hard when reading the HOWTOs, but not something I'd want to explain to a non-computer type person how to do.
The upgrading is definitely nice though.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
All I use is the first .iso image, edit apt sources by hand (uncommenting the first three), add in my network card's module, make sure I choose "advanced" instead of "simple" install, and I quit dselect as soon as I'm dumped into it (worthless, in my opinion). Every question is straightforward (cfdisk is easy, hostname, IP, gateway, dns, hit the enter key a bunch of times to install everything from the cd, enter root password, create user and then get to installing software)...
Of course, this leaves me with a ~60 to ~80meg OS, and I immediately apt up to sid and install anything I need. I like this method because I know there's little to nothing installed that I don't need.
Second, the initial package selection systems are _really_ lacking. The simplified task-centered selection seemed like a good idea, but did not work in practice. As it is an old machine, I did not want X or any X applications on it, so I deselected that task. On the other hand, I did want developer stuff, so I selected that. Unfortunately, that resulted in it pulling down X and a lot of related stuff anyway. If there is supposed to be such a task division, it needs to be done well, or not at all. I then ended up in the app for individual package selection. I started to browse it - but hit Enter by mistake, and was dumped out of the program, without a warning and without a chance to undo the action. Not good.
So now I had a bare Woody install - really bare, like in "I need to apt-get less" bare. This was fine with me. For some reason, however, I had a 2.2 kernel. This both annoyed and surprised me, as Woody is supposed to use the 2.4 kernel. No problem - I just pull down a newer kernel package. Unfortunately, the newer kernel packages all had a pcmcia module package that was incompatible with the kernel itself.
I was about to get the kernel source and compile it for myself, but when rebooting to the 2.2 kernel (for the fifth or sixth time that day) I got a kernel panic when trying to boot the machine. As i had been at this for the better part of six hours, I gave up, got the Redhat boot disks, and got a functional, configured, X-less installation done with minimal fuss in two hours.
/Janne
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
No it isn't. Go and read the GPL. This really gets me... people thinking GPL==free downloads on the net.
Try NetBSD... safe,straightforward,useful.
Both the Slashdot story and the Libranet main web page lack any indication of WTF Libranet is!!!!! Had to dig around before I found out that it was a distro. Come on people! I realize that writing goodful is not anybody's priority -- but "animal, vegetable or mineral" is the first part of any description.
I see that they charge for upgrades from one version to the next. (I.E. --> Existing Libranet user $39.95) Does that not kind of make apt-get dist-upgrade a bit useless?
Either way -- if I were going to purchase a new Linux distro, I would give this one a shot. With Debian "Clones" (storm, corel, etal) it has always been a bit of a catch-22, because you have all the power of apt-get, but apt-get is only as good as the updates (and frequency of said updates) waiting on the other end.
(+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
Libranet is not a Debian rip off. Libranet takes Debian and adds enhancements. Enhancements that people want. Also, remember that if we get lots of orders, then this means we can spend more resources on helping the Linux community. Right now we only have the resources to focus on just the distribution. - Tal a Libranet developer
Libranet GNU/Linux
I currently use both Debian and Libranet on my home systems. While I personally find Debian easy to install and configure, I think that Libranet has done an exemplarly job in making their install very easy. It has hardware autodetection, can set up a burner and zip drive and allows you to easily configure a network or dial up connection in a way that a novice will understand.
There are other benefits as well. They have a package called XAdminmenu that logically groups many administration tools together, a control panel of sort, that is easy to use and properly annotated so that a new user can configure their system. There is also an active user community that is very newbie-friendly. Plus the support provided by their staff is exceptional and often goes beyond the offerings of other software firms.
Naturally there are also the benefits of being a Debian-based distribution. While they base their current release on Woody, you can easily bump it up to Sid if you wish too. And for new users, once they master APT (or Synaptic or GNOME-APT) they will be introduced to Linux with out the hassle of dependency hell. That is worth something right there.
In short, you get a slightly more polished version of Woody, with current software, support, and a pleasent Linux experience for very little dollars. That in itself is a bonus to our community.
For those that bitched: download the 2.0 iso from their site and give it a whirl, then give me your opinion. Otherwise be happy and stick to your distro of choice.
You're in the wrong place. I suggest www.stupidity.com
the usual Debian installation (harder than necessary)
:)
I hate how everybody always hates on the Debian installer. Seriously, when I first installed Debian (second distro, I was a newbie), I had no problem giving it the six disks, then having it download the packages I wanted, and configuring windowmaker. If people actually bothered to read the installation manual, they'll figure out that the step-by-step installation isn't hard. And if you have to maintain the same distribution for many different platforms and kernels, you can't use a pretty X11 installer, and you have to have the installer be modular.
This is not intended to be a flame at all, and I appricate everybody's feedback.
Cheers, Orange
Is the new Libranet based on Debian 3.0? I can't seem to find anywhere that will say so.
well, maybe this is a troll, maybe it isn't.
but no, the GNU license doesn't require you to be able to download it for free. it only states that if you get the binaries from them, they have to provide the source at cost of media.
so if you don't get the binary distro from libranet, they have no reason to give you the source.
what I don't understand, is why the first person to get the binaries and source, doesn't just post it on linuxiso or something. libranet can't really stop them, because the GPL also grants the right to redistribute.
anyway...
MORTAR COMBAT!
Uhm, no. The GPL stipulates that you must give the source if asked at the same price that offered the application. So, if FOO.COM sold GNU tar cd's for $500,000, then they don't have to give the source for anything less than $500,000 (with the binary-if-offered of GNU tar as well, they couldn't charge you $500,000 for the binary and $500,000 for the source as well).
Enhancements ? Yeah great, the only thing that you provide is your admin menu , and a new installer. Dont fluff yourself buddy. Your doing the samething that everyone else is in the distro race, your just one of the few that force people to buy your product.
haha
Installing Linux is such a pain in the ass.
Look mods, this wasn't meant as a flame. It's the truth.
The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
It comes from anecdodal evidence. Plop a newbie right in front of a Debian installer, and they probably won't be able to do it.
I've heard the "I tried installing Debian as my first distro because I heard it's good, but I could install it, gave up, and installed Redhat/Mandrake/SuSE.. then after a year when I became more experienced, I switched back to Debian" story quite a lot.
I did not want X or any X applications on it, so I deselected that task. On the other hand, I did want developer stuff, so I selected that. Unfortunately, that resulted in it pulling down X and a lot of related stuff anyway. If there is supposed to be such a task division, it needs to be done well, or not at all.
I'm not sure how much better this could be done. A developers task that does not include a GUI library seems lacking; and GUI library will logically depend on X stuff.
Duh, free, except for bandwidth costs is reasonable.
Grr. It's not up to you how they distribute it, that is my point.
And worry about == and = if you want but until the the "three bar equal sign" is on my keyboard, I'm gonna do what i want.
Try NetBSD... safe,straightforward,useful.
Jeez, nobody is forcing you to use it (I use Debian/Unstable personally). If you think that Libranet is a Debian ripoff, you obviously don't understand the concept and spirit of Free Software and the GPL.
Remember, it's free as in speech, not beer.
Also keep in mind that they DO offer the last major version free, I think.
Having a central system administration program is a BIG feature for anyone from a newbie to a seasons sysadmin. Having a good easy to use installer with hardware detection is important especially for people new to Linux, or those setting up lots of machines. You may have time to spend a few hours/days/months tweaking your system, but many people want a system that is ready to go as soon as it's installed.
People also argue, that hey, want up-to-date Debian, just use Debian unstable, get GNOME for experimental, KDE from another source, and XFree86 4.2 from yet another. True, IFF you are quite experienced at using the Debian packaging system, and willing to pick up the pieces when somthing breaks.
Libranet is designed to be a system ready to go from the moment the install is finished. No need to install extra packages, fight with hardware configuration, etc. At the same time it's Debian based so you have the power to do anything you want with your system and have the huge Debian archive as a ready to use resource.
- Tal a Libranet developer
Libranet GNU/Linux
all partitions are identified only with /dev/hdaX - with no size indication or other information
If you choose the "Partition your hard disk" option, it will show you the filesystem type and size of existing partitions when it runs cfdisk. I consider the lack of partition lables a design flaw in the msdos partition table format. If you're using other patrition table types it will correctly show you the labels too.
Also, there is a bug with the installer that precludes a net install over pcmcia hardware with a fixed IP adress.
I just did this today and it worked fine. You must have experienced user error.
So now I had a bare Woody install - really bare, like in "I need to apt-get less" bare.
This is not an ideal solution, but it sounds like what you wanted was a bare system, plus the "build-essential" meta package. It will install all of the stuff you wanted (libc-dev, less, gcc, make, etc...) without X. If you want other non standard development libraries you'll still have to load them yourself, but it's a mere 'apt-get' away. The build-essential package is great for when you want a minimalist development environment without all the typing.
Find it :) they dont , they publicly state that they dont. Reason: they didnt get enough money from 2.0 users. It is also not free speach you have to pay 45 bucks to download what they have to say.
haha
Presenting a choice that in fact is not doable is not the way to do it, however.
/Janne
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
They say in the message boards that it si because not enough people buy it.
Doesn't make any sense to me. I can't download it, I can't try it out... if I can't try it out, I won't buy it. I'm not gonna shell out cash for something without knowing what it's like - especially when there's freely downloadable alternatives.
I've bought Slackware (multiple versions, from Slackware 96 through to 8.1), and it's well worth the money.. during the time it wasn't up to snuff for Desktop use, I bought Mandrake.. both distros were downloaded first, and bought later.
They also say that they want 100,000 users in 3 months.
And I want a toilet made out of solid gold, but some things just aren't in the cards.
If they want to increase their user base, they need to make ISO's available for download.
you included in your post that you were talking about version 2.0. if other people are idiots and want to start flaming, then hey, that's there problem.
what's really concerning is that you are obviously a user and advocate of the OS, and their own developers are flaming you, when all they had to say was, "Version 2.7 comes with KDE xxx and Gnome xxx". But no, they decide to go the "stupid moron, what do you mean old" route.
MORTAR COMBAT!
I can see how these phrases might equate to "A nice Debian-derived distro" -- to a Debian user. To this non-Debian user, they implied some kind of software associated with Debian.
>I've said this before. The Debian installation just isn't that hard. I'd like to hear some specific points about what makes it difficult other than that it isn't X based, but rather console based.
You have to know exactly which kernel modules to use for you ethernet card. Redhat autodetects. Debian doesn't autodetect or suggest any hardware.
It has been statistically shown that helmets increase the risk of head injury.
You can download it for free. Version 2.0 is available right now on their website. They will, eventually, offer 2.7, as well.
Glad to hear it, Progeny was my first glimpse at Debian, going to vanilla Debian afterwards I was impressed at how much I missed Progeny.
Nothing more that a toy?????
I work for a very large medical diagnostics company and we are in the process of removing some Windows 2000 servers and replacing them with Linux servers. It's going to save the company that I work for millions of dollars.
Hell of a toy, huh?
Easy Debian installation is a nice idea, but I think Stormix did a wonderful job when they existed. It was my first Debian installation experience -- they did everything right. It wasn't just (X) eye candy either, they actually added some neat features like auto-detection of Windows partitions and lilo configuration for such things. I had a dual boot system without even so much as glancing at /etc/lilo.conf. I can't imagine this distro is doing anything better (technically, at least) than Stormix, but I wish them luck.
(Score:-1, Wrong)
What the hell are you talking about? Please, please, please don't compare the security of Apache servers to IIS servers......
Thanks for making me laugh.
Your points are good ones. Why should I remember the chipset in my video card when the OS can do it for me?
Debian *had* a good installer with Progeny. I don't know why it got canned, but I thought they (Debian) were going to use the Progeny installer?
I don't follow Debian closely, so someone correct me if I am wrong.
Moon Macrosystems. Sun's biggest competitor.
This is my story of course some of this is due to the fact that the first time I tried was with 2.1 and the next with 2.2 and the installer had become *much* better in that time. I think many people will only be happy when it is GUI based and I don't think that will ever happen.
Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
Yes, I agree with you.
haha
The Debian installation is a bit hard, but I prefer Debian because it is one of the few distros that doesn't install everything but the kitchen sink. YOU decide what you want to install AFTER the install phase by apt-get'ing only what you want. Other distros that install all software at install time are very difficult do do this properly (Redhat, Slackware, etc.). Also FreeBSD and Gentoo seem to be good about this too.
Similar example. I installed Debian and it provided a number of network card modules. I had no idea what network card was in the machine. Why should I?
So I installed with a guess, and it was wrong, so the install was screwed and I had to do lots to fix it. Not at all pleasant.
In addition, today disk space is so cheap that, if you are installing from CD, you should just install everything that doesn't conflict and let people remove later. Don't give them a lot of questions to answer. Even an experienced user (now hitting my 25th year of use of Unix or something like it) gets tired of having to answer a lot of questions that in the end just don't matter.
And the inexperienced user is even more blessed if they don't have to answer those questions. If you can undo, if you can fix it later if you need to, then DON'T ASK. Or ask once if you the user wants to answer more detailed questions or wants a simple install.
Now since Debian network installs, I can see how you want to limit the load on servers, that is a point.
Plug and play is the way to go. If you can ever make it so the user can just plug it in, and it works, do it. Even if it's a bit slower. Does the user want DHCP or static IP? Don't ask the user, ask the DHCP server! Let them undo it later to static IP if they need it.
Host name, time zone, user name and partition style. That's about all that needs to be asked at install time.
Has it been over a year since you last donated to the Electronic Frontier Foundation
I've said this before. The Debian installation just isn't that hard. I'd like to hear some specific points about what makes it difficult other than that it isn't X based, but rather console based.
In addition to the other points mentioned, it's probably worth noting that a good portion of Microsoft's NT/2000 OS setup (not sure about XP) is still console based. Specifically, the portions where partitions are selected and managed, and file locations are provided. Most consider the NT installation pretty simple, so I don't think this is a huge issue for people migrating from Windows (read: most).
(Score:-1, Wrong)
from Myuu's post: even at 2.0 (what, did they skip a couple numbers =P) it came with really current packages
pretty clear that Myuu is talking about version 2.0.
sorry about the "attack" thing, been a bad, bad day and flat text sometimes carries things it shouldn't.
MORTAR COMBAT!
no, they didn't skip a couple of mumbers. Libranet has been around 2 or 3 years
And what number system do YOU use that offers the well-ordered sequence: 1.8, 1.9, 2.0, 2.7 ?!?
89% of all statistics are made up.
I just ordered a copy. My one gripe with Woody is that it's still using XFree86 4.1, along with KDE 2 and the older QT. I need the latest XFree for xv display in video players and kino. I realize I'd be able to install it myself -- that's what I did with SuSE 7.3. Upgrading KDE, though, seemed too much trouble. I think these guys are doing a great job making Debian more accessible to the non-expert, or someone who just wants some more convenience. Having the code compiled for 486 rather than 386 is also nice.
Free software isn't about nobody making a living from it. I'm happy to support Libranet -- there's a lot of people that could benefit from Debian that aren't ready to take it on cold. I wish Libranet would donate some percentage or fixed amount of their sales to the Debian project, like LordSutch.com does. After all, most of the work is done by Debian, and it would be a good gesture.
I have a few questions for experienced Libranet users, or for the Libranet people on the thread.
First, I have mixed feelings about Libranet's custom installer, Libranet Adminmenu. Part of the attraction for me of going to Debain is that I don't want a layer between me and the GNU/Linux control files. I appreciate adminhelp at times -- I'm enough of a newbie to benefit from it. So the question is, does the Adminmenu generate a host of new files, like SuSE's YaST does, or does it just modify the existing admin files (/etc)? I'd like to see what the machine is doing -- isn't that part of the point of ditching Windows?
Second, a major attraction with Debin is apt-get. Does Libranet have its own apt repository for upgrades? More importantly, can you use apt-get to add applications from Debian archives -- applications that Libranet either did or didn't include? How are dependencies handled in cases of conflict?
Finally, is Libranet feeding its improvements back to the Debian project?
In my view, Libranet can perform an important and hopefully sustainable service supporting a cutting-edge but stable version of Debian. Just the ticket as far as I'm concerned.
David
My guess is that someone will, eventually. Y ou can get older versions via download - reference
b ranet
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/distributions/li
It may just be a matter of time.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Funny that that 2.6 doesn't exist...how odd.
2.0 however, the prior release, got great security reviews from what I saw.
"Libranet's aim is to build a good system for people to use."
It's typical documentation, it makes sense if you know what it's talking about. If you don't know it's a distro (or rather a "system"), that page doesn't really help you at all. And the front page post was worthless too, as was the site's front page.
XP as well. But that's only the partitioning and file copy phase. The first time the installer reboots the machine, you're in vanilla VGA16 mode, then next time, you're in with full display capabilities. All in hands off mode after the first few questions.
I just did this today and it worked fine. You must have experienced user error.
Nope. With a 3com589 pcmcia card and static IP the install fails. I found the mail of another user with the identical problem, and eventually got confirmation from a developer that this indeed was the case.
So now I had a bare Woody install - really bare, like in "I need to apt-get less" bare.
This is not an ideal solution, but it sounds like what you wanted was a bare system, plus the "build-essential" meta package. It will install all of the stuff you wanted (libc-dev, less, gcc, make, etc...) without X. If you want other non standard development libraries you'll still have to load them yourself, but it's a mere 'apt-get' away. The build-essential package is great for when you want a minimalist development environment without all the typing.
As I wrote, this really was fine; I was aiming for a bare-bones kind of system after all. What was not fine was that I did not get it through consious planning, but through an abysmal lack of anything resembling UI design on the part of the installer. As for the 'build-essential' meta package, it's not too easy installing it without finding out such a thing exists (if that in fact is not the very same package that insisted on dragging X along with it).
In any case it is moot, as the supposedly superior apt system managed to hose the system for me, convincing me I'm better off with an RPM-based system after all.
/Janne
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
In addition, today disk space is so cheap that, if you are installing from CD, you should just install everything that doesn't conflict and let people remove later. Don't give them a lot of questions to answer.
Sounds like you've never tried to setup a secure server...
Ok, I agree that you would temper this for anybody exposed on the network (which you can detect without asking of course) or for those who want to set a security level. So you don't install everything, but nor do you ask people about things they don't even know about.
Has it been over a year since you last donated to the Electronic Frontier Foundation
I would jump on this distribution if it supported both my soundcard (ICE1712/Envy24) [very important] and my video (Radeon 8500) [X11
AND console fb].
Yes of course I could install Alsa for the sound support, and yes of course Radeons are supported in the XFree 4.2.0, but it would not be any more (or less) convenient with "Libranet" than with stock Debian.
Before you criticize my choice of sound card, bear in mind that the Delta/Midiman cards are just about the ONLY serious choice for a pro card that works under linux. Perhaps there have been some 24/96 products released lately, but that would be big news to me.
Alas, the 2.5.33 kernel is almost the only thing needed, but, the Radeon framebuffer stuff is broken now. Maybe next week?
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
everyone complains about debian. too slow to release, too hard to install... etc, ad nauseum.
folks. there are other distros. use them instead.
I've come to believe that mandrake is the first distro you use, red hat is the second and then once you realize that you should be reading slashdot and other such sites and start hearing about debian and graducate to that. after debian you start thinking about trying linux from scratch. thats just the nature of the beast. I kind of like it that way.
-
how exactly is it going to save millions of dollars, I could understand saving a few thousand if they were new servers, but replacing windows 2000(which I assume is paid for) with linux seems more like a way to spend money on support problems
Couldn't you just install the older, 2.0 version, which you can download for free, and then upgrade using apt-get?
I'm not sure how much better this could be done. A developers task that does not include a GUI library seems lacking; and GUI library will logically depend on X stuff.
...
I'm not sure I agree about the `no GUI library == lacking', but
It would be nice if there could be automatically-derived tasks, e.g., `install x-developer if the developer and x tasks are both selected'.
We live, as we dream -- alone....
I've said it before, and I'll say it again... WTF is with everyone griping about Debian's _installer_? It might be a *little* obtuse, but it's not insanely difficult, and for crying out loud, you only install a Debian system ONCE! After that, it's all 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade'.
.deb.
Who gives a flying F if the installer sucks, as long as _after_ it is installed, the software is insanely easy to get/install/compile/whatever? With apt-src, you can even grab the latest tar.gz and let it install a freshly compiled
GIR: I'm going to sing the Doom song now. Doom doom doom doom doom doom de-doom doom doom doom doom doom doom...
(if that in fact is not the very same package that insisted on dragging X along with it)
.deb format that make debian superior. .deb files and rpms are essentially equivalent. The benifit comes from the package database. All of the dependancies are consistant in the debian package database which relieves all the problems that you have installing rpms from various vendors/providers. The number of packages available directly from debian is also far greater then what is available through any other distribution.
build-essential does not include X, or anything X related. The text based installer is not forgiving to people who answer questions claiming to be an expert when they are really not. If you choose the expert options in the debian installer, and you are not a debian instalation expert, you will become lost and frustrated. This is poor social engineering on the part of the debian installer team, since most other installers require you to choose 'expert' to be able to configure things the way you want to and that causes people to claim that they are experts by default whenever they install software. If you'd like a more 'friendly' installer, you can try PGI, which is graphical, and superior to anything I've seen for any OS except suse. It is not the default installer for debian yet, but it works practically perfectly, and would likely satisfy you.
What distribution you use is personal perference, so I'm not really trying to sway you in either direction, but I would like people to know that your experience is not typical. Debian is not the right choice for everybody, but it is also not the technical nightmare that you are implying.
the supposedly superior apt system
Aah, noteriety through misunderstanding. Contrary to popular belief, it is neither apt, nor the
If apt hosed your system it is either because you were using a faulty mirror, you did something wrong, or you were using unstable.
"I have been an MSCE for 2 years now" You and everyone else... "Reach around and 'work it' with his hand" You're really clueless eh?
Couple of guys at the white box shop wanted to install Linux on their machines. Asked me what was what. I said "Debian is good, but it'll take a little more to set up. RedHat is..." "No, no, RedHat is lame!"
Anyway, they went with Debian. Luckily, they have a fast 'net connection, so I could go and fix some things they probably missed (adding security.debian.org to apt.cache, etc.)
I'm glad things are working out for them, but it took me a fair bit of work. But I figured that the more people in the area who know Linux, the better... Now, I just hope they learned enough not to screw other people's Linux machines up and give Linux a bad name.
Ordering a laptop. They'll be moving Win2k into a small partition. I'll be installing Gentoo with every possible P4 optimization set. We're all looking forward to that one.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
I first used Libranet v1.2.2 then 1.9.1. It was great to use. The support was good, ran fast, apt, good selection of packages, stable, easy install. I'm presently using Woody. If you're looking for something highly usable, try Libranet.
Go well
I've always found the online intructions confusing, and I run Gentoo on my two machines so count out any fear of dirty hands.
LibraNet has it backwards. If it was available, I'd try 2.7 now. Plus they'd have a jump on everyone else as the first non-beta distro with KDE 3.x and GNOME 2.x.
Looks like I'll still be waiting for RedHat 8 and Mandrake 9.
JWL.Freakwitch.net
As I remember the reason that the Progeny Installer is not yet in debian is because the Installer has not yet been ported to all the CPU types that Debian runs on.
I recall hearing that someone (can't recall whom off the top of my head) was hoping to finish the ports and get the Progeny installer into Sarge at some point.
If you don't understand why this is such a big project look at the supported architectures: Alpha, ARM, HP PA-RISC, Intel x86, Intel IA-64, Motorola 680x0, MIPS, MIPS (DEC), PowerPC, IBM S/390, and SPARC.
Work bio at MMWD
Mod parent up
This one needs a +1 Funny
In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
With all likelihood the next Debian release (Sarge) will come with a new installer that's currently in progress. Hopefully, that will solve most of the problems that people have with the current installer, e.g. lack of hardware detection.
Please alter my pants as fashion dictates.
I'm sure the Libranet folks have brewed up a mighty fine installer, but the fact is that Debian is not really very hard to install. Heck if you want to be safe about it, just add an extra hard drive to your system and have at it!
Possibly what takes time about Debian is totally customizing it to make it l337 just like you are, but unfortunately you just can't buy that kind of thing.
I'll tell you what, getting XFree86 up and running with 3.3.6 used to be a major hassle because the modelines were always wrong. XFree86 v 4.x is an incredible improvement in that it can autodetect your modes via a PnP monitor a lot of the times. Heck I have a GeForce2MX in my box and never made a single modeline! (And I get 125fps with QuakeForge!) The days of pain are over, I say!
Don't be fooled, Debian is not for total gnubies, unless they be exceptionally perseverent, but anybody with a smidgeon of Linux or Unix savvy should have few troubles with it. You need to know your network parameters, and it helps a lot if you know how to edit an XF86Config-4 file, but it isn't totally neccessary anymore like it used to be.
Clickety Click
If we could break away and use Linux or BSD, we could thumb our noses at M$ auditors and kick their sorry asses out of the building, or have them hauled off to jail for trespassing. See how the worm has turned on us?
Clickety Click
With all the talk about Debian installer problems in this thread, I'm surprised no one has mentioned that a new Debian installer is coming along. From what I hear, it should rock pretty hard when it's done (no, it's not based on the Progeny installer, and for good reasons).
Respondeo dicendum quod . . .
It'x not about X-based vs. Console-based. Libranet's installer is console based, and it's MUCH easier than Debian 3.0. I've installed both, and I am not a fledgling newbie. With Libranet, I was minorly miffed that it didn't ask me a few questions I'd rather it have asked me, but it was easy to change those settings once the system booted. With Debian, I spent an hour just configuring X, because I have becomes used to at least some minimal autodetection. Sure, I could write out XF86Config-4 files myself, but I get the same results if I let such matters be autodetected, and then tweak them the tiniest bit.
Think on this: Libranet asks no hard questions during install (in 2.7, even partitioning can be "automatic" for those who have no idea what a "mount point" is) and boots you into a fully functioning Debian system, complete with gdm. Debian asks questions even I would have bee unable to answer a year ago, and boots to a command prompt.
One problem Debian "the instalkler IS easy" types have is telling the difference between "easy" and "asks me all the questions I want to be asked". The latter kind of installer is (in a sense) better, but it's not "better" in the sense that more people can use it.
I want my Cowboyneal
Small consolation for you: I've been using apt-get on RH for several months now, with good results.
:)
Get apt for RH from http://freshrpms.net/
Specific links for RH 7.3: http://valhalla.freshrpms.net/rpm.html?id=10
Just make sure that when you build the apt root you use file permissions ('bloat' is the term) so you can actually use it
--
Sigh... That's not true. I just installed Debian and it suggested quad copper IBM G5's, a GeForce5, and a Fibre array.
Debian does not deal correctly with diacritical-accented characters. Most applications are just OK, but Mozilla & Galeon are not. Also, there's not a decent graphical email that can do all of local mail, POP, news and IMAP at once. Evolution, for example, crashes; Mozilla mail, besides being too big and slow is useless due to not handling accents.
Moreover, the LANG environment variable doesn't always affect GDM, Gnome and several Gnome applications consistently. For example, Galeon always launches in English, but its second window opened will be localised.
I wonder if Libranet or any other Debian derivative, or even unstable, is better?
Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
DA, DBA, SysAdmin, Data Modeller
GNU Project, Debian GNU/Lin