Slashdot Mirror
Mandrakelinux 10.2 Beta 1 Toured
Anonymous Coward writes "The first beta of Mandrakelinux 10.2 has been released. New package versions and features include some changes to the installation program, kernel 2.6.10, glibc 2.3.4 and gcc 3.4.3. You also get KDE 3.3.2, Gnome, 2.8.1, and GTK 2.6.1. Mozilla-firefox replaces Mozilla, and you will also find gimp 2.2, cdrecord 2.01.01a21 with DVD+R Dual Layers support, OpenOffice.org 1.1.4, Postgresql 8.0, and MySQL 4.1.9. Improvements are also seen in the Mandrakelinux Control Center ergonomy, to ease the network configuration with a better integration of the firewall tool. OSDir tours Mandrakelinux 10.2 Beta 1 with GNOME and KDE in their Screenshot Tours."
Does this also mean it comes with Thunderbird to replace the mail?
:)
I like the idea of Mozilla as a whole suite of applications, that way you dont have to install multiple applications, when web+email are the 2 more popular applications. To each his own I guess, Thunderbird is rather nice and works with my exchange server (imap).
Also.
In the next betas, you will be able to copy all the CDs packages on your hard drive, so that you will not need the CDs anymore afterwards to install a new package with urpmi or rpmdrake. Moreover the installation will allow to boot from a USB key (if you cannot boot with a CD), and to save the packages selection on a USB key.
Nice, I actually took my cdrom out of my linux box but it has a USB port. Handy, now to test usb booting.
One important difference between Mandrake and other distros is that it's compiled for recent processors instead of the works-everywhere 386 target. Which in theory should make some difference in performance, but you never hear anything about that.
It's a bit slow to boot and to run, and I don't like some bits of it like the control centre, but it's can be good for newbies...
That said, I tried several distributions (starting with Mandrake 9.2 and returning to later version of Mandrake) dual-boot when I was still using Windows, and Gentoo was the first that I actually used more than Windows. After using Fedora and Mandrake, I actually thought that Linux boot up times were inevitably longer than Windows.
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
Exactly. I mean, if you boot Fedora or Mandrake into single user mode I'd imagine it will be every bit as fast as whatever your Gentoo setup is. Or if you turn on as many services on your Gentoo machine as comes standard on a default Fedora or Mandrake install then your Gentoo machine will probably boot just as slow.
Of course with Gentoo you get the leetness of needing to do everything by hand. But if you don't like the Mandrake control center, then feel free to be just as leet on Mandrake and do things by hand there.
As for Mandrake being slow, my guess is it's just the -O7 --ultimate compiler flag placebo effect of Gentoo.
Free will is just an illusion
Actually thats [sic] assuming that you can turn on as many service [sic] as is available on Mandrake on Gentoo , [sic] its [sic] not the case [sic] there [sic] not available.
Actually, portage has the largest collection of software available of any package management system I've ever used, and yes, I ran Mandrake before I switched to Gentoo.
Also , if you dont know how to setup a system , thats why its going to be slow to boot , on any system. (I'm not going to take the time to notate the errors in this quote.)
This is true; however, my experience with Mandrake was that a lot of services are on by default, whereas with Gentoo you have to explicitly install and enable the services you want.
As for the Gentoo speed bulshit [sic] its [sic] already been proven to be just that [sic] bulshit [sic].
I would like to see some citations of this. Though I'd also like to point out that the draw of Gentoo is not the supposed speed increase, at least not for me. It's the USE flags.
"You're older than you've ever been, and now you're even older."
So what criteria must be satisfied to create a new version of a distribution?
Time.
Every six months for Mandrake. And they are right because that is the only way to do it: all free software projects are independents and have different schedules (when they have one).
Why can't the distribution just provide the updated files through means like urpmi and you upgrade the packages that need to be upgraded?
Money.
Distribution makers need cash at a constant (or increasing) rate. Free updates does not gives money. Microsoft has the same problem: they need that customers upgrades to their latest OS.
Why the need to download ISOs, burn to CDs, reboot the box and perform the installation/upgrade?
You don't have too.
You can find with Google how to upgrade your system without reinstalling with CD images mounted without burning them. But if they told you clearly how to do it, you would not buy new CDs.
Also, it is easier for everybody (you and them) to support a system installed from scratch, than a system upgraded every six months for 5 years.