Slashdot Mirror


Debian 3.0r6 Released

Polkan Garcia writes "The Debian group has released an update to the 'Woody' distribution of the popular GNU/Linux OS. From the site: 'This is the sixth and final update of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 (codename 'woody') which mainly adds security updates to the stable release, along with a few corrections to serious problems. Those who frequently update from security.debian.org won't have to update many packages and most updates from security.debian.org are included in this update.' More good news: r6 is the final update of woody, the new stable release is coming."

5 of 297 comments (clear)

  1. Ahem... by niko9 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    before the usual rants about debian begin....

    let he who has donated at least one line of code, cast the first stone...

    1. Re:Ahem... by Umbral+Blot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sure in theory we should all contribute before criticizing. However this is not practical. Want to criticise MS, go work for them. You hate SCO, go work for them too. BSD not what you want, go fix it. In my opinion it is OK to criticize something that you aren't a part of, as long as you make reasonable points.

  2. Re:Heh. by Nicholas+Evans · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What the hell do you mean, finally? The last update to Woody was April 16th of this year.

    Unless you know what you're talking about, please don't try to troll. It just makes you look bad.

  3. I think it is a good idea not to update quickly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As much heat as Woody gets from the Slashdot crowd, I think it is a good idea to have a stable release that doesn't update very quickly. Keep in mind that, as "old" as Debian is, it was released in 2002. It is no older than Windows XP (2001-2002 release) and is a good deal younger than Windows 2000 (1999 release). One of the servers I have an account on is a RedHat 7.2 machine, which is of the same era as the first Woody release. While I develop on Fedora Core three, I make sure my software compiles as is on a RedHat 6.2 system (2000 era).

    For servers and corporate desktops, an update every three years is a frequent update. I am glad that Debian has been current with security updates on this three-year-old release; I would rather have that than the updgrade treadmill Fedora has me on. (The Fedora Legacy project seems to be comatose) In fact, I'm going off of the treadmill--my next Linux will be CentOS (a no-cost generic clone of Red Hat Enterprise Linux) which will allow me to have sane updates--once a year or two instead of once every six months.

    1. Re:I think it is a good idea not to update quickly by nihilogos · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The thing is, Debian stable is actually really, really stable. The uptime for a file / intraweb / domain server at a busy record store I part-time admin for is 454 days. It was installed 454 days ago. If this server goes down, the crappy stock system freezes (possibly corrupting data if someone is doing an order or receiving stock) all the checkout staff have to logout of their machines while large queues form at the counters, and generally it's a bit stressful for people.

      Why the heck should Debian compromise on its definition of 'stable' for people who want to play neverwinter nights? Especially as, like you say, you can just run sarge anyway?

      A big thankyou to all the Debian maintainers. May all your beers be cold.

      --
      :wq