Slashdot Mirror
Libranet 2.8 Review
TheMadPenguin writes "When I heard about Libranet 2.8 containing KDE 3.1 and kernel 2.4.20 in our forums, I just about fell out of the chair I was sitting in. As you all probably already know, Libranet is a Debian-based distro aimed toward the desktop user. Until now, I had never heard of a Debian release with all the newest goodies, but my world was about to get turned upside down. Read the full review with screenshots at MadPenguin.org."
If you wan't the latest and greatest (!) then you'd simply use the Sid branch of Debian. Sure probably lots of things don't work but oh you'd have the latest.
If you are more sane then you can simply track the Unstable branch. This is a good tradeoff for people who don't like the relatively old packages found in Stable.
In other words you have a choice. You can also use numerous unoffical apt-get sources for such stuff.
Stop thsi Debian myth now.
I use FreeBSD and fonts are one of the reasons why I still do development on Windows with my computer. The fonts look 10 times better and are more pleasing to the eyes.
I use true type and anti aliagned fonts in X but they do not look as good as Microsoft's or Apple's.
If anyone knows of a website where I can download them that would be greatly appreciated.
http://saveie6.com/
While LibraNet is certainly impressive, I must mention that Knoppix provides the "cutting edge" traits mentioned -- KDE 3.1, Linux-2.4.20-xfs, etc. -- with the bonus of the most mature automatic hardware detection algorithms in the x86 space.
:-)
And once you run knx-hdinstall, apt-get is more than happy to function normally.
Knoppix is very fun to see spread through schools; it's exponential growth at its finest
Yours Truly,
Dan Kaminsky
DoxPara Research
http://www.doxpara.com
It's a second, actually. SuSE has been doing that for ages.
No it has not. You cannot download SuSE ISOs. You can download a live CD (for nothing) and then use that to install your distribution via FTP. This has been the case basically forever.
Reality is defined by the maddest person in the room
and you can find it here.
Sorry, unstable/testing isn't really cutting edge either. It took 9 frigging months for Xfree 4.2 to appear in Unstable, and it took even longer for KDE3!
:)
Yes, and that's where you lack the background context about why the above 2 things took a long time.
Incidentally, Debian is more unstable/cutting edge than you think. It has had gcc 3.2.3 pre-release versions for months, and the glibc maintainers seem to regularly do updates from CVS. The samba in unstable is 2.999alpha23. The new module utils for kernel 2.5 are already packaged for unstable as well... are you running 2.5?
The thing is that Debian is a de-facto portability test for XFree86, because Debian releases on over 10 architectures. The maintainer for the XFree86 packages doesn't package newer versions until he has them working on all architectures, and this takes time. I do find it annoying, but a laudable goal (it's not like new versions of XFree86 really give me that much anyway).
As for KDE, this was delayed further because of the transition to gcc 3.2, which had yet another different and incompatible ABI to gcc 3.0. It was felt it wasn't worth putting KDE in, only to have to go through a painful packaging transition for 3.2. Instead, the KDE maintainers just opted to wait for the transition to start before they entered Debian.
See, just because some things are slower than you expected doesn't mean the rest of unstable isn't in fact quite up-to-date, maybe more than you'd like