Slashdot Mirror


Debian Announces Sarge Will Include GNOME 2.8

El Cubano writes "A recent posting to the debian-devel-announce mailing list announces that Sarge will release with GNOME 2.8. From the announcement: 'After requests and a detailed proposal from the GNOME team, we accepted an upload of GNOME 2.8 into sid, and, via the usual mechanisms, into sarge. We should mention that the release team was running out of objections to GNOME 2.8 in unstable that the GNOME team hasn't satisfactorily addressed; this, and the fact that they have demonstrated good reaction times of late are the main reasons why we're approving it despite the timing.'"

14 of 276 comments (clear)

  1. KDE by ultrabot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How about KDE 3.3?

    Not that it really matters anymore - many of whom have been waiting for Sarge have got with the program and switched to Ubuntu.

    --
    Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    1. Re:KDE by quinto2000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Did you run it on all 15 of the architectures that Debian supports? Lots of Linux software runs fine on some architectures but not on others. Debian is committed to only releasing software that runs on all of them. The user-friendly Debian-based distributions may be nice in other ways, but they usually only worry about one architecture - ia32 or sometimes ppc.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un post
  2. Re:good for debian, good for users by Captain+Large+Face · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Also, this might help combat the "Debian [stable] never includes new stuff" meme. Another good thing.

    "New" is relative. After stable switches from Woody to Sarge, it is highly unlikely that you will get a new version of GNOME until Etch becomes stable. So no, Debian stable will never be the place to look for new stuff, except when the stable version changes, but then that is the whole idea.

  3. Almost time for regular users to run testing by martinde · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've been running stable (woody) since it came out, and it has served me well. I started using Adrian Bunk's backports, and then selected things from backports.org... Then I upgraded to KDE from downloads.kde.org, and then openoffice from some other backport collection. Amazingly enough, this collection of software worked well enough for me.

    I recently took the plunge and converted a couple of machines to testing (soon to be sarge). First thing I will say is that even with all of the backports, the upgrade went very smoothly. And I'll also say that sarge is working well for me; so well that I've installed it on several other machines using the new debian-installer rc candidates, and that has worked flawlessly for me as well!

    As soon as security update support is up and running for testing, anyone remotely interested in sarge should consider upgrading and filing bug reports as appropriate. This is how you can help speed up the "real" release of sarge!

    And I do think that when sarge comes out, it's going to be an excellent platform. It is so much nicer about hardware autodetection, font handling, and about a million other things... Without losing any of the old things that you love about Debian.

    Lets hope that the next stable release doesn't take too long, although given Debian's nature, it's hard to see how it won't... Assuming the official compiler moves to gcc 3.4 (or the upcoming 4.0), then there is going to be another painful transition for all of those C++ applications. Hopefully someday g++ will have a stable C++ ABI and those transitions won't be an issue for projects shipping C++ libraries... (This was one of the major issues for getting KDE into unstable earlier this year.)

  4. Re:Is Armagaedon upon us? by arose · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Stable is for people who need an unchanging system (no, I'm not one of them), please leave it alone.

    --
    Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
  5. Re:Anonymous coward is confused by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    So which is Sarge?

    Situation now:
    potato = obselete
    woody = stable
    sid = unstable
    sarge = testing

    Once sarge is declared stable,
    woody = obselete
    sid = unstable
    sarge = stable
    unknown = testing

    So, sid will remain unstable and a new name for the testing branch will have to be decided (unless I missed something and that's already happened).

  6. How about these? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    PostgreSQL 8,
    PHP 5,
    Tomcat 5.0.x (5.5 would probably be pushing it a little..),
    Sun jdk1.5?

    1. Re:How about these? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Dude this is still Debian STABLE. It's one thing to advance to slightly more modern software, it's another to put in Postrgresql 8 when that hasn't even been released yet!

  7. Re:Is Armagaedon upon us? by vrt3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But AFAIK there isn't really an alternative for people who are willing to use a somewhat changing system. unstable changes too much; it's OK for a desktop, but not for a server. testing would be acceptable, but doesn't get security updates.

    So I run stable on my little home server, eagerly awaiting the release of Sarge.

    --
    This sig under construction. Please check back later.
  8. Re:Sarge Will Include GNOME 2.8 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Don't be naive -- Saddam will have a "heart attack" shortly before his trial.

  9. Re:Is Armagaedon upon us? by vrt3 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It happens regularly that something I'd like to be on my server is not yet in stable; I can't remember all of them, but things that I can remember are Python 2.3 (or even better, 2.4), MySQL 4, PHP 5.

    --
    This sig under construction. Please check back later.
  10. buffer overruns by synthespian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But isn't this due to a "cultural" problem? For instance, the fine OpenBSD guys have given us strncat and strncpy, and a patch has been applied to glibc in August 2000.

    http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-alpha/2000-08/ ms g00052.html

    GNU/Linux programmers have a bad track record on this issue. Not to mention safer languages. Consider the little attention a mainstream language like C# has gathered in the community (I won't even mention other languages that achieve C-like performance such as SML or Common Lisp). People use C for everything, not just systems programming. The result you get to read at CERT. And let's not even mention formal methods...

    --
    Main difference between the BSD license and the GPL license: one is from California and the other is from Massachusetts
  11. As a Debian user myself... by Cyn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have to ask, who the hell runs stable on a desktop - and who would want to?

    If you want stability, testing provides plenty of it. If you don't want to update often - just don't update (often). If you really need rock solid core stability, but want newer desktop software - then run stable with apt-pining for testing or unstable, and only install what you know you want from testing/unstable.

    If you want a Debian desktop with frequent releases without all this crap, use Ubuntu :P

    Stable is supposed to be the rock solid hardware, and the only things that should change should be when there's a bugfix or security fix. The point of it is you can basically rest assured that when running updates, shit won't ever break. I don't mean just "PAM broke!" break, I mean config overwritten, changed options, etc. break. The system for all intents and purposes could be set to automatically grab updates and run for years.

    Disclaimer: I've never used Ubuntu, I'm a Debian man who suffers the trials of using apt-pining just like everyone else who wants this should have to!

    --
    cyn, free software and *nix operating systems enthusiast.
    1. Re:As a Debian user myself... by Technonotice_Dom · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have to ask, who the hell runs stable on a desktop - and who would want to?

      If I was rolling out a set of desktops for corporate usage, stable is ideal. You don't want testing, which is prone to breaking dependancies (unless you're near freezing time), nor do you want unstable - you don't want to be troubleshooting brand new packages, you need them to just work.

      With stable, you have rock solid security support, very few if any changes, and all package upgrades are tested far more than any other repository before being uploaded. A corporate desktop wouldn't matter if it was still using Gnome 2.8 in two year's time, providing there aren't any huge revolutions...