Slashdot Mirror
Libranet 2.8 Released
Jon Danzig writes "Hi, Libranet 2.8 has been released and I hope you will inform your readers. Libranet is our implementation of Debian to which we have added our installer, up-to-date software e.g. KDE, Gnome, kernel, etc., and generally packaged GNU/Linux into a super smart fast and stable system. The installer has sophisticated hardware detection and setup with flexable installation of software packages. We keep hearing that the Linux Desktop is on the horizon and while the horizon never gets any closer Libranet is steadily making its way in that direction."
Quit improving so fast. Wipe machine, install new RedHat. Wipe machine, install new FreeBSD. Wipe machine, install new OpenBSD 3.3. Wipe machine, install new Libranet.
Can we all just get along?
Trolling is a art,
Looks kinda cool, but can we cool down news of such Linux releases back-to-back. First it was Redhat 9, then Redhat 64-bit, SuSE 8.2, now Libranet.
Look, where is Windows man? I mean Windows 2003, reviews, ads, interviews by Steve Ballmer about how his coders worked 46 hours a day, ads for Win 64 bit???
Slashdot must be neutral.
-------- Cluster bombing from B-52s is very, very accurate -- the bombs always hit the ground.
(Insert smileys where appropriate - it's a joke, son.)
-- "Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?"
I run Redhat for clients and on a couple of boxes at home but IMHO Libranet can't be beat. Using 2.7 and apt-get is a relief sometimes after putting up w/ Mandrake's and Redhat's rpm dependencies. The Adminmenu tool works great, even comes w/ a built in firewall. The installer is ncurses based and not as pretty as other distros but it works and works well. Hell, Libranet is the first distribution that I got Return to Castle Wolfenstein running on. Some problem or the other always crops up w/ Redhat. Also, the mailing list is well populated w/ helpful people. Not much RTFM comments on there.
This guy is way out there
Why do they need a NEW distrobution for this? Can't they just add their improvements to Debian? Now I need 10 distros based off Debian. One for installs, one for graphics, one for music, one for work, one for servers... I mean come on! Let's work together here!
Also do they maintain their own apt repository?
good question. In my opinion, to pay $70 for basically... well... knoppix, they better keep their own apt repository stocked with everything I could possibly want, and the latest builds. I want to apt-get the latest kernel within a day or two of release if I have to pay that much.
Otherwise, what possible motivation would I have to buy it? It doesn't really give me anything.
And don't think this is just the oss-won't-pay-for-anything mentality. Really... the screenshots look exactly like knoppix without the name. knoppix has the hardware detection, is based on debian, etc. So what logical reason would I have to pay for something that I can already get for free?
Now, this is not to say there's anything wrong with trying to make money from Linux. However, it's truly unfortunate that there's no way to check out this distro without shelling out some money. RedHat lets you download for free, as do all the other major distros. However, they'll also take your money if you want the box version or if you want support. Libranet can't seriously hope people will shell out money to switch to this without being given a risk-free chance to experience it.
And, since they basically took Debian, modified it, and made it not-free as in beer, I'm wondering why they just got free publicity on Slashdot.
There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
Can someone please explain to me why they need to have a 'Preferences', a 'Tools', a 'System Settings', a 'Utilities', and a damn 'Control Center'!!! MAKE A CONTROL PANEL!! Put it all in the same place!! Every time I go to look for a dang program setting I have to wade through menu options forever! Is this some strange organizational system that makes sense to everyone else but me?!?? :)
No I didnt spell check this post...
In my opinion, usability also is a measure of how hard it is to install a package, recompile a kernel, etc.
I am not talking about usability for people who need nothing more than vi, find, and grep to manipulate their system. My mother doesn't care about installing packages or recompiling kernels. She, like many other users, wants a system that behaves in an intuitive way, and just works the way it's expected to work. RedHat has pulled that off quite nicely. Not to mention that in an ideal system, you don't have to install packages yourself or recompile the kernel (especially the latter). With RedHat9, everything my mother's system needed was right on the three discs. The kernel didn't need recompiled because it was all modular. Nevertheless, these still are not usability issues my mother is concerned with. What is a usability issue is that the menus were cleanly arranged -- programs she would use where there. The user interface is consistent, beyond just look and feel but also organization, and so on. RedHat 9's environment felt a lot like MacOS X's environment insofar as its clean, elegant features.
I haven't even gotten into how much better apt-get is.
I am a Debian user and have been for years now. Debian is the only distro that I would ever use and ever recommend to other technically minded people. However, after wrestling with boring, default Debian packages for the desktop environment and other annoyances that just would not work (truetype in Mozilla for instance) I found RedHat was far better suited to the task of being a desktop distribution. Most everything I needed worked out of the box, many things I never got quite right in Debian. As for installing things like Flash, that's 3rd party software and it's an annoyance on any platform.
Libranet is nothing special outside vanilla Debian, so that makes it even more irrelevant in this case.
Join Tor today!
Businesses may want the a support contact that I don't think you can get from Debian.
As Debian is sooooo stable (and changes infrequently) I always wondered why more SW companies don't list Debian as a suported Linux platform. But it comes down to support, theyre not going to qualify a product on a platform they can't get business support for.
It's crap that SW companies will qualify a product on a RedHat or SuSE platform that becomes outdated in 6 months. Its to expensive to retest every Six months so technicaly don't support newer distributions (this why RH is shipping AS and AW versions).
Perhaps thats what Libranet's aiming for - bu then again they appear to be a little known disti so I'm talking crap.
"Things that you own end up owning you" - Tyler Durden (via Diogenes of Sinope).
Everyone who is trolling libranet has obviously never used it before *waits for more trolls on how it isnt free*... For those that want a preview on what they can expect can go to LinuxISO and download libranet's 2.0 essential version. I have tried it and it is absolutely fantastic--from the installation to the tools (adminmenu) everything worked great, better than any linux distro I have ever used.
Libranet is also well known for having superior technical support and has a very friendly userbase that offers to help the newbies rather than tell them to RTFM.
Try before you Troll, thanks
I was a happy Libranet user for a while; they do maintain a repository of updates. Most of the updates come from the "official" Debian distribution, though.
Basically what you're paying for is, as far as I can tell, a raftload of up-to-date apps, an up-to-date kernel, some convenience apps for setting things up nicely, all on top of a relatively stable release of Debian. If they've bumped their price up as one poster said, I don't see how it's worth it. When I bought a copy, it was on a set of CD-Rs and came with a manual--on letter-size paper stapled together, no less.
It's nice, it's stable, it's relatively hassle-free (as hassle-free as Debian ever is, and then some) so decide whether or not that's worth your while. It wasn't to me, but then again, I'm foolish enough to use Gentoo Linux as my main distribution.
Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
Someone can do with GPL-ed s/w whatever he or she wants, provided that if he or she distributes their derivative they _must_ include the sources.
So, the website does not have to have links to downloadable ISOs or something. But if you buy their product, the sources have to be available to you. And _you_ can do with these sources whatever you want to (under the GPL), even provide free downloads on the net.
Wenn ist das Nunstueck git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.