Slashdot Mirror


LinuxOrbit Looks At Libranet GNU/Linux 2.7

GonzoJohn writes "Linux Orbit has reviewed Libranet GNU/Linux 2.7: Other Linux distribution companies have tried to create commercial Linux products based on Debian GNU/Linux, but few have achieved long term success. Progeny Linux comes to mind as a commercial Linux distribution company whose Linux product met with good reviews, but couldn't remain in business. Libranet is a rare exception to this rule. Libranet GNU/Linux has been around quite a while and continues to build a devoted Linux user base on a commercial product based on Debian GNU/Linux. With their most recent release of Libranet GNU/Linux 2.7, Libranet continues to improve on an already solid Linux distribution."

13 of 163 comments (clear)

  1. slackware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The only Linux distro I would run on a server is Slackware because it is the least performance hungry and most stable distro out there and I have used almost everything. Debian is great on workstation, but not servers because its just a bit more resource hungry then Slack, but it is easier to use for common tasks! Frankly all my servers run BSD except for database boxes for which nothing beats Solaris with Oracle running on top, but most firms and people cant afford Sun Servers so they should run BSD for things like Apache and MySQl. Now you can comment away.

  2. New Users, Huh? by Mandi+Walls · · Score: 4, Interesting
    (I'll try to leave my usual Debian-disparaging comments out of here. You can check my past comments for some of those)

    But I will say the Libranet GNU/Linux 2.7 does NOT use X Windows for the graphic installation routine. Instead, Libranet uses easy to follow ncurses-based text menus for its install method is disturbing. After having walked 17 new-to-UNIX students through an ncurses-based ftp install of Red Hat, I will tell you that ncurses is not the way to go for new users.

    Why? Because there is NO work-alike in the Windows world. What do I mean by that? Well, occasionally, you'll end up with a new-to-UNIX user who remembers DOS, or has used a terminal-based app before at work. What have they probably never seen before? ncurses. You are throwing them right into the fire, and giving them nothing that looks familiar to work with.

    Talk about pain. And misunderstanding. And confusion about what the icons really represent and the cursor-flow mechanisms.

    GUI install is where it's at. It's the best way to get a new-to-UNIX person onto a UNIX-alike system from install on, because you're building on something they are already familiar with - clicky clicky buttons and menus.

    But you can ignore me. I just teach this stuff. :)

    --mandi

    1. Re:New Users, Huh? by iggymanz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      nonsense, remember the ncurses-like installs of the later versions of DOS? GUI assumes you have proper driver for graphics card and mouse, not always a good assumption given space limits of install media.

    2. Re:New Users, Huh? by frozencesium · · Score: 2, Interesting
      there is NO work-alike in the Windows world

      Um...maybe I'm the only one here who has ever installed NT??? I mean...it's not like the fist half of ANY NT based install startes out with an ASCII interface that some people find even harder to use than ncurses.

      Well, occasionally, you'll end up with a new-to-UNIX user who remembers DOS, or has used a terminal-based app before at work. What have they probably never seen before? ncurses

      As others have mentioned, this type of interface was not only prevelent during the DOS days, but many of these interfaces weren't as easy or intuitive as ncurses. When I finaly made the switch to linux (about 5 years ago), I had no problems with the install interface. Now granted I might be a rareity, but if I can walk new users through it all the time, and they don't complain...then from what I have seen, your argument is not very valid. Of course the others are right, it's also nice to have access to an install interface that is not video driver dependant.

      Ok, ncurses isn't as flashy as a GUI, so maybe we start out with some simple ncurses stuff untill we can get X11 installed and running a svga xserver to compleate the installation...just a thought, but it should be feasible...

      As for your regular Debian bashing...I can't imagine why you would want to bash Debian. True the install system isn't as easy as Redhat, but with 3.0 they have made a lot of improvements. Debian is IMHO easily the most stable distro out there. Even Debian's Sid (unstable) is fairly rock solid in my experiance. For those less daring, the stable distro simply does not break. Granted you won't be running the latest and greatest versions of software, but with the stability, simplicity of package management, the ease of security patching (just proper lines in your sources.list and an addition of a cron job), and the ton of pre-packaged software availible...it's a damn good system. If stability is a primary concern, I can't think of a better distro. After all...what is one of the biggest complaints of windows people? "It crashes all the time"...

      I teach this stuff too...just my $0.02

      --
      I'm not always the brightest pixel in the stream
  3. UHM PROGENY STILL IN BUSINESS by waspleg · · Score: 1, Interesting

    www.progeny.com

    for those of you who don't know it is a commercial company founded by the original creator of linux and is based in indianapolis

    eventhough it appears that they are no longer releasing their own distribution just modifying debian they are certainly NOT out of business

  4. Re:Problem with commercial Debian by PCM2 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    When I used RedHat, I always bought a CD for each upgrade (from 5.0 to 5.1, to 5.2, to 6.0 etc). The reason: upgrading meant manually download individual packages and installing them in the right order.
    But wouldn't you agree that this makes Debian a better distro for people who want to learn any kind of serious syadmin chops vs. something like Red Hat?

    Speaking as somebody who upgraded a production Red Hat 4.2 box to glibc2 by hand, I still cringe every time I overhear somebody asking for help with their Linux problems, and the first thing out of the "guru's" mouth is, "Which version of Linux are you using?" Not kernel version, not software versions -- Linux version. And of course they mean which version of Red Hat is installed.

    To me, Red Hat version numbers are almost completely meaningless -- unless you're not actually using your box.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
  5. How is it better than plain Debian? by Ian+Bicking · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I read the review, and it wasn't clear to me how this was significantly better than plain Debian. It seems to have a better installer -- and that's nice, but it's just not enough to make another distro worth it. They mentioned an admin tool, but again... that's just one tool (but if it was all-encompassing, that would be cool, but I didn't get that impression).

    Sure, there's lots of apps -- but that's because it's Debian. Why is it really better?

  6. Strange Pricing by sterno · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So I went to look at libranet's product because I like debian but would like something with a better installer and hardware detection. I thought to myself that I could just download the ISO from linuxiso.org but that maybe I should help support them and pay for a real copy. So I decided to look at the prices.

    They offer 4 different prices, one for past customers, one for new customers, one for students, and one for corporate users. There is not an immediately obvious difference between any of these releases and I can still download the ISO's from linuxiso.org. A student discount makes sense, fine, but then why does a corporation have to pay more per copy than a home user?

    It seems like a much better model to offer two levels of product. The first is a retail model (possibly with an available student discount) with instructions, limited technical support, etc. Then you offer corporate contracts where you agree to provide a higher grade support (24 hour service, increased response time, etc) and you provide that at a higher rate. I see no evidence that as a corportate customer I would get anything better for my extra $40/copy, especially when I can just download an ISO.

    --
    This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
  7. My Libranet Experiences by greenskyx · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've been using Libranet since the 1.x days. I've found it to be a very good distrobution. I found the Libranet install to be very easy and I love apt-get. Libranet reminds me of what Mandrake used to be in it's earlier days. It is a lot like Debian but with a lot of extra value added in. My favorite feature is their kernel compiling setup. They have a very easy to use process that lets you recompile your kernel. After you recompile the kernel it adds the newly recompiled kernel to lilo and keeps the old kernel as a lilo option so you can switch back if you have any problems.

  8. Still Debian for me by dh003i · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm still not sold on this new Debian-based distribution. I'm not an idiot newbie user, so i can handle Debian's text-based approach to installation, administration, and customization.

    So why should I shell out $60 dollars for Libranet? All of these applications it has can be downloaded and installed in Debian. The one major exception appears to be Adminimenu, which you can only get (to my knowledge) by ordering the Libranet CD or downloading the ISO. If you really want the program that bad, just download the ISO and burn it on a CD. Then find it in the CD.

    But there's a reason (a good one) why Debian is always "behind the times" and doesn't include the latest software. Stability and continuity. Are all of these latest applications really that essential to get? No, most of them aren't. So let other users and other distributions struggle with their bugs.

  9. Here's a thought by incripshin · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Instead of it being GNU/Linux (four syllables), it could be called GNUL? Huh? HUH? Pronounced like NULL so it would only be one syllable. On second nobody'll listen to me.

  10. Bad business model & big whiners by dh003i · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A few comments.

    (1) Giving away a ISO for download is all good and fine for non-profit Linux distributions like Debian. It makes sense. It doesn't make sense, however, for a corporation trying to make money off of it to do that. The Linux community is not going to chastise the company because they don't offer ISO downloads. Think the path of least resistance. If you want to sell a product, you shouldn't also make it available for free.

    (2) I stand by my earlier assertion that this isn't worth the extra $60 as opposed to downloading Debian. Almost all the additional software apps it has can be downloaded. And there's a reason why Debian doesn't always include the latest greatest software -- because it usually has problems. Debian prefers to let other distros walk through that minefield and benefit from the knowledge gained.

    (3) For those of you talking about how much more "resource hungry" one distro is as opposed to another (i.e., many saying Debian more resource hungry than Slackware), do try to remember that they're all based around the same thing. You can remove anything you don't like, and if you remove enough stuff, Debian eventually looks like Slackware.

    (4) For those of you whining about having to say all those extra syllables in GNU/Linux. Get over it. Its three extra letters to write, and if your giving a speech you don't have to say it every time. Distributions can simply be referred to by their distribution name (i.e., Debian) for short. But when something is written formally or said for the first time, it should be "Debian GNU/Linux" or "Redhat GNU/Linux" or whatever it is. Because that's what it is. Most of the tools and utilities and programs you use in a distribution are GNU stuff. Its only appropriate to say Debian GNU/Linux when speaking (at least upon any introduction; it need not be said more than once upon entering a new topic, after which simply Debian suffice's). It is not that hard to type in Debian GNU/Linux at the beginning of a paragraph.

    Credit should be given where it is due. If your going to mention the kernel of an OS like Debian, you should also mention all the software around it. Hence, formally, Debian GNU/Linux.

    I get sick of hearing how the FSF and Stallman are so greedy and unreasonable by expecting us to (at least formally) call a distribution like Debian "Debian GNU/Linux". Asking for due credit is not greedy or unreasonable. And, quite frankly, the reason they're asking isn't because of vanity, but because few new Linux users have any idea about Free Software and what it means to them.

    Stallman was right when he said that he was being written out of history. GNU/Linux supporters don't want to bother telling new users about that wierd, long-haird, hippie guy who's always talking about this silly notion called Freedom. People afraid to talk about Freedom in the context of software because they think it makes them seem weak and foolish.

  11. Ever install windows 2000? by petard · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The initial interface of the Windows 2000 installer bears a strong resemblance to ncurses. I think it's even still there with XP. The long and short of it is, if users want to install any OS (as opposed to just using it) they'll probably have to learn something new, GUI or no.

    --
    .sig: file not found