Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mandrake 2006 Will Integrate Conectiva Components

Posted by timothy on from the synaptic-is-pure-gold dept.

Linzer writes "Mandrakelinux just issued this press release presenting (1) a new one-year release cycle, with a year-based naming scheme and (2) their updated development roadmap. In a nutshell: the upcoming 10.2 becomes a transitional release, labeled 'Limited Edition 2005.' Next fall will see Mandrakelinux 2006, merging Mdk and Conectiva know-how (and possibly some know-not?) For the amnesic: Mandrakesoft and Conectiva recently merged." Not everyone is pleased, though: Tingulli 3 writes "As a member of the Italian Mandrakelinux translation team , I spent nights translating some packages to be on schedule for the 10.2 release. I was quite disappointed when I discovered that a new roadmap has been announced and that there will NOT be any 10.2 release, without anybody announcing it to the community."

13 of 142 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Flaky networking made me switch to Fedora by Lord+Kano · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Urpmi makes it a breeze to install everything on Mandrake.

    Urpmi is THE main reason why I haven't sought out another distro. I quit using Red Hat in favor of Mandrake because I got sick of rpm-depend-hell. Urpmi solved that forever. I don't particularly like the options that they compiled Apache with, but that's minimal compared to trolling through rpm-depends.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  2. Maybe the distro isn't that important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The place where Linux has a real competitive advantage is the less wealthy countries. Compared to the other costs in an organization, the Microsoft tax is a much bigger deal there. What they need is a local source of Linux expertise. They can't pay European wage rates. So, as long as Mandrake doesn't corrupt Conectiva's value chain, they have bought their way into a growth market. Having the distro may just be the cost of entry into the market. As long as they don't try to subsidize the distro with the Brazilian business, they may have found a winning business model.

  3. From the blurb.... by Infinityis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "I was quite disappointed when I discovered that a new roadmap has been announced and that there will NOT be any 10.2 release, without anybody announcing it to the community"

    I could be mistaken, but wouldn't that announcement qualify as an announcement to the community?

    1. Re:From the blurb.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "the upcoming 10.2 becomes a transitional release, labeled 'Limited Edition 2005."

      That says to me that it's been renamed, not cancelled.

    2. Re:From the blurb.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Personally, because I enjoy the distribution. That's really all there is to it. It's simple to install. I can do anything on it that I can do on other distributions, and PLF has lots of crunchy goodies that I would typically need to compile if I was running most anything else. Anything I can do for Mandrake makes a better distribution for me.

      I support companies that give me what I want. I also drop products from companies that don't like a rock. Actually I have no loyalty to any entity, commercial or not, that produces a product I don't want to use.

  4. Re:perfect distro? by Lord+Kano · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The only way to evaluate a distro is to install and use it. If you're thinking about mandrake, or Suse, or Fedora, or Debian, or whatever. See if you've got the space to try it out and then do so.

    Mandrake is my distro of choice, but I understand that it isn't for everyone.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  5. Re:Mandrake is a bit odd anyways by dmf415 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Mandrake's installation is a little heavy, but it's ease of use will make most newbies pretty happy.

  6. Re:I await by KnightMB · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As long as they keep pushing out great distros, I wouldn't care if they called it Mandrake v3.14ø (Midnight Flying Frogs) Edition. Been a long time user of it, always been happy with the release and I help hundreds of people switch from windows to Linux using this distro as a good starting point.

  7. Trying to understand the naming scheme by publicworker · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In a nutshell: the upcoming 10.2 becomes a transitional release, labeled 'Limited Edition 2005.' ... ["]I was quite disappointed when I discovered that a new roadmap has been announced and that there will NOT be any 10.2["]

    So the unhappy Mandrake community members are the ones that don't understand the new naming scheme?

  8. Re:Mandrake History by burne · · Score: 3, Insightful
    receiving fat oil vouchers from Saddam
    And that makes it all right for Bush and Blair to lie to the rest of the world? Oh, and 8% of the oil sold under the oil-for-food program went to France, compared to 41% labelled 'America'. The likelyhood of fat bonusses on the Hill is equally larger. You snivelling self-righteous liar! :>
  9. Re:Flaky networking made me switch to Fedora by nametaken · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Fedora's "yum" makes dependancy hell a thing of the past, by and large. Just for the record. :)

    From the site...
    "Yum is an automatic updater and package installer/remover for rpm systems. It automatically computes dependencies and figures out what things should occur to install packages. It makes it easier to maintain groups of machines without having to manually update each one using rpm." - http://linux.duke.edu/projects/yum/

  10. Apt-get has major problems as well by scheme · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Yes, except yum is much inferior to urpmi, both theoretically (urpmi has better algorithms and datastructures) and practically (yum has a shitload of bugs, such as big problems working with an install-root different from /). urpmi and apt-get are on par with each other in my experience (mature, good performance scaling), and I can't see why redhat shose yum, as both apt-get for rpm and urpmi are available to them and are both superior...

    apt-get has major deficiencies in regards to multilib support (32 and 64 bit versions of an app or library installed at the same time) . Namely, it doesn't support it at all. This is a huge problem if you need to run 32bit apps or libs on your 64bit system. E.g. if you want to run openoffice.org on your amd64 system in 64 bit you'll need to run the 32bit version openoffice since it's not 64bit clean. Same thing if you want to run something like flash or realplayer.

    If you look debian on amd64 gets around this by installing a debian ia32 install in a chroot and running 32bit apps in a chroot jail due to the apt limitations.

    Given that people probably want to start migrating to amd64 systems and run a 64bit os, the fact that yum supports multilib and apt doesn't is a major bonus for yum.

    --
    "When you sit with a nice girl for two hours, it seems like two minutes. When you sit on a hot stove for two minutes, it
  11. Frequent community versions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I was going to say I haven't seen anywhere mentioning this but then I noticed Warly suggesting it on the mailing lists. So long as there are at least two non-commerical yearly releases per year I'd continue to be Mandrakelinux user (I don't want to use a "rolling distro" like Debian unstable/Gentoo so switching to cooker wasn't an option). The worry is how long you get security updates / fixes for. If it's less than 1 year / 2 releases or not at all then the deal doesn't look so good.

    I consdier this to be analogous to the Fedora/RHEL model used by Red Hat and rumour has it that SUSE will turn into something similar (with Novell Linux Desktop being the RHEL bit).