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."

5 of 163 comments (clear)

  1. Problem with commercial Debian by Dionysus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think the problem with commercial Debian derived distributions is that there are no 'guaranteed' future income. Debian makes it so damn easy to upgrade.

    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. When I recently upgraded from Debian 2.2 to 3.0, all I had to do was change the sources.list, do apt-get update, and apt-get dist-ugprade. All dependencies and installation order was taken care of.

    With RedHat (and I suspect other RPM based distributions), they were 'guaranteed' money from me, since I wanted to upgrade. With Debian based distribution, I no longer feel the need to buy a CD to keep current (even on dialup).

    --
    Je ne parle pas francais.
  2. These Names Suck by Pave+Low · · Score: 5, Funny
    Libranet GNU/Linux? Can anyone seriously say this without getting tongue-tied or feeling stupid?

    Seriously, open source software just does not name their products well. Who in God's Green Earth this is a good name for their product? It's not sexy or cool, and is too convoluted for such a simple product, which is Linux.

    And the number of times this articles says GNU/Linux is more than enough to make me nauseous.

    --
    SIG:Slashdot: indymedia for nerds.
  3. Re:slackware by schon · · Score: 5, Informative

    I had something like 5 kernel panics over the course of 6 months under Slack, none so far in 8 months under Debian

    What did you change?

    I've been running Slackware for 5 years (on a couple of dozen servers, and on my home and work desktops and laptop), and have never _once_ had a kernel panic, in any version (from 3.0, up to and including Slack 8.1)

    Performance was fine too - I don't know what you mean by "significantly better performance", perforance doing what?

    crontab entry to do updates from security.debian.org can do them unassisted

    You've never run an important box then, because no sysadmin worth his salt would ever trust something as critical as security updates to an automated process. You manually test each update on an offline machine to make sure nothing breaks (like maybe the config file changed?), then deploy it on the live machines. Trusting software install to a script is just asking for trouble.

  4. 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.

  5. Uh, Progeny *is* still in business by Overfiend · · Score: 5, Informative

    [Sorry, repost. I had cookies turned off in this browser so my login didn't work. Please mod down the Anonymous Coward version as redundant, not this one; thanks.]

    Progeny Linux comes to mind as a commercial Linux distribution company whose Linux product met with good reviews, but couldn't remain in business.

    I guess I have Santa Claus to thank for the paychecks I've been getting every two weeks for the past 2 years plus, then.

    Progeny did discontinue its Progeny Debian product, but we remain in business and continue to do interesting things, IMO.

    --
    Address-collecting spam robots don't know how to crack ROT13. Do you?