Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ubuntu 6.06 'Dapper Drake' Beta Available

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the penguins-in-tophats dept.

Beuno writes "Ubuntu 6.06, aka 'Dapper Drake' has just gone into a stable Beta phase after 5 very successful Alpha versions. There have been a ton of improvements ranging from a new spiffy graphical installation, Gnome 2.14.1, Kernel 2.6.15.6, X.org 7 and a new and improved caramel colored theme. The server version has had kernel tweaks and an easy LAMP installation. A full list of new features and screenshots and be found at the official site. Downloads at the usual place, just try to use torrents please."

90 comments

  1. Yeah! by Mathiasdm · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Edgy post!

    --
    Join the anonymous, help develop the network: http://www.i2p2.de
    1. Re:Yeah! by Simon80 · · Score: 1

      The above is pasted from Penny Arcade.

  2. Best Bug Report Evar! by Synesthesiatic · · Score: 4, Funny
    Microsoft has a majority market share

    It's nice to see a distro with a sense of humour. I especially like that the severity is set to critical.

    1. Re:Best Bug Report Evar! by aerthling · · Score: 2

      More sad than funny. I remember visiting 5 computer shops in the large town (50,000+) in which I reside in during semester, looking for a copy of Fedora Core, and none of them had any other OS in stock than Windows. One owner even told me that Linux was a dirty word in his store. I was slighly flabbergasted.

    2. Re:Best Bug Report Evar! by jb.hl.com · · Score: 2, Informative

      You do realise that Fedora Core isn't a boxed operating system and isn't available in stores, don't you?

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    3. Re:Best Bug Report Evar! by NutscrapeSucks · · Score: 1

      This is understandable, because Linux is not being positioned as a "product in a box", but instead as vehicle for enterprise service contracts. The computer store guys can actually make decent money supporting MS SBS, while Linux sends all the contract revenue back to RedHat etc.

      --
      Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
    4. Re:Best Bug Report Evar! by aerthling · · Score: 1

      Yes, but I know of a few stores where I live that have the most popular distros available as burnt CD-Rs, and will download requested distributions upon request.

  3. Upgrade from Breezy - FTA by QuaintRealist · · Score: 4, Interesting

    gksudo "update-manager -d"

    And the update manager gets the beta for your existing Breezy install. Just tried it on one box, and it worked without a hitch. Each round of upgrades gets a little smoother. I was worried about the 6-month release cycle when Ubuntu first announced it, but the ease of transition lately has made this a non-issue, at least for me.

    --
    Using plain ol' text since 1968
    1. Re:Upgrade from Breezy - FTA by jZnat · · Score: 1

      And for those of you who aren't afraid of a little bit of command line stuff:

      Edit your /etc/atp/sources.list file by replacing all occurrences of "breezy" with "dapper". Save, then run "sudo apt-get update ; sudo apt-get dist-upgrade".

      Damn kids and your GUIs... ;p

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
  4. What does Ubuntu have... by baadger · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...that other reasonably polished Gnome distributions don't?

    I'm really curious. All the 'why I use Ubuntu' type opinions i've read seem to be focused at the n00b. What's in it for a the more experienced Linux user (but not a mad bash hacking pro)?

    1. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honestly - I used to be a Gentoo guy. I still am, at heart...but the fact that you just install Ubuntu and it (when I say it I mean practically EVERYTHING) works right off the bat saves you time and effort which you can then use to customize your system the way you want it.

    2. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by Simon+(S2) · · Score: 2, Insightful
      What's in it for a the more experienced Linux user (but not a mad bash hacking pro)?


      It Just Works©
      --
      I just don't trust anything that bleeds for five days and doesn't die.
    3. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by B5_geek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ubuntu is not _just_ for n00bs.

      Does a 'n00b' system admin run Debian?
      not usually.

      Debian is preferred because
      (a) "apt-get" makes life so blindingly simple that you don't need to worry about 90% of the hassels that come with other distros (rpm-hell anyone?)
      (b) It's stable
      (c) "It Just Works!" (tm)

      Ubuntu is: ALL the best of Debain + Quicker updates.
      How long did it take for Debain to support SATA in the stable release? Too damn long!

      Ubuntu is not totally user friendly, ie it wasn't untill Dapper that there was a GUI for setting up a pppoe internet connection. (try telling Mom to: open a terminal, type pppoe-conf, and follow the prompts.)
      Sounds great on paper.

      My mom, Uncle x2, wife, Mother & Father in-laws, and CLIENTS all run Ubuntu because it is easier for me to manage/admin.
      I'm not a n00b. I got desperately tired of waiting for Debian Stable. Now I have all the good of Debian + modern packages.

      --
      "The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
    4. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Coherency.

    5. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by baryon351 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What's in it for a the more experienced Linux user (but not a mad bash hacking pro)?

      Only speaking for myself and others like me (which may not be much different to yourself judging by your description) ubuntu comes with a lot less fucking-about-with-inanities than other distros.

      I like that I installed dapper and everything worked. I don't mean "it booted to a desktop and I needed minimal fiddling to get my camera working, oh and sometimes sound drops out but I got that fixed in half an hour... and I can't use my music player yet cos it won't mount", I mean I can install it and there's everything working and working well.

      Don't get me wrong, I do like to jump down into the OS and screw about with things from time to time. I figure if I want to do things unique to myself that's what I'm going to have to do, and any linux distro will give me that. It's just the core simple things that I feel any OS should do well out of the box that many other distros have missed. They've come mighty close, but don't QUITE get there fully. Like installing SuSE and not having sound working like it should. Like installing debian and having an endless argument with fonts. Like installing fedora and finding it plays downloaded movies fine, but the ones from my camera are missing audio... even if they play audio fine on linspire but the video skips frames. It's those little core things that are so braindead simple they should always work first go, that when they don't they make me really feel like I'm working for the other distros when I have to screw around to get them working, instead of the distro working for me.

      Recent Ubuntus have been the only ones that are fuss-free for what I consider those core elements of a desktop machine. Other people might have different core wants of course, and different hardware that other distros handle better - but meh, I'm not those other people. Works for me.

    6. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by baadger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm using gentoo amd64 atm and the only complaint I have is there is no easy way to get many browser plugins working with the firefox-bin or opera (32-bit) packages.

      The last attempt I had at installing Ubuntu Breezy was a disaster, the partitioning situation was pretty poor (I already had 3 primary partitions, 1 windows, 1 freebsd and 1 extended and the Ubuntu installer couldn't seem to cope with it) and then after the thing was installed it refused to boot (just hung).

      Things for me 'just work' just fine with Gentoo, my question is: *what am I missing* by not using Ubuntu?

    7. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by BigJim.fr · · Score: 1

      It is Debian with a nice layer of solid varnish. I love plain Debian on the server or on a sysadmin's workstation, but on worstations for users who just want the whole thing to work with sane defaults out of the box it is very satisfying, requires very little maintainance and it is still Debian.

    8. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by mbrubeck · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Here are some things Ubuntu has that (many) other distributions don't:

      1. New stable releases twice a year.
      2. Security updates for at least 18 months for each release.
      3. One of the fastest response times for security updates.
      4. Simple, well-integrated software installation and update tools (synaptic, gnome-app-install, update-notifier).
      5. A huge, up-to-date package repository based on Debian Sid.
      6. Single disk with both LiveCD and graphical installer (new in Dapper).
    9. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by Bromskloss · · Score: 1
      It Just Works©
      It doesn't recognize my hardware. :-(
      --
      Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
    10. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by glarvat · · Score: 3, Informative
      I've been using Linux full time since '97. I'm no crazy kernel hacker, but I've done my share of development. Although Ubuntu is the first Debian based distro I've used, it's by far my favorite. I started with RedHat, then SuSE, was with Mandrake for quite some time, then Gentoo, now Ubuntu. The two main reasons why I love Ubuntu are:
      • Package Management
      • Sudo

      The package management has all the ease of Gentoo's 'emerge,' but without the compiling. Plus, you don't have to worry about something breaking as often. One thing I used to hate about the old RedHat/Mandrake package management was that you'd try to install an rpm, only to be told you don't have its dependencies, you'd get those, and then you'd have new dependencies to track down. I'm told yum has fixed that, but I haven't bothered to look. I know it's much better with up2date on the RHEL4 side, but it still feels less polished than Synaptic.

      Before Ubuntu, I'd never really used sudo, but now I find it difficult to go back. To me, it's just a cleaner way to do system administration, and it certainly helps promote never logging in as root. All of the system administration is sudo oriented, whereas ini RHEL4 you still need to know the root password. On a machine with shared administration, it just seems more clumsy.

      I know distribution choices can be a touchy subject, but I definitely prefer Ubuntu. The whole system just feels cleaner. As a more experienced user, I like it because it stays out of my way and lets me get my work done as quickly and painlessly as possible.

    11. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by Bromskloss · · Score: 1
      Coherency.
      Whoa! Like a laser, you mean?
      --
      Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
    12. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 1

      It's the first Linux distro I would feel comfortable inflicting on my parents, while still being a joy to inflict on myself.

      I'm a CS major, and I do basically all my development on Linux. It's been pretty much the most cooperative distro I've ever run across. Cooperative when I want to do something advanced, and cooperative when I don't (as in "I don't want to manually config ALSA").

      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

    13. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if you already have a system set up that's usable the way you need it, then there's not much point in switching to Ubuntu. But, if you need to set up a new workstation or computer for yourself or someone else, it's a good way of getting it done without going through all the hassles of other distros.

    14. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by just_another_sean · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well just going by your post and obvious affection for Gentoo, I'd say not much.

      If you've already made up your mind and like a distro, quirks and all, chances are you won't really get any new, instant, where-have-you-been-all-my-life gratification from another distro, even a quality, polished distro like Ubuntu. Gentoo is also a quality and polished distro, just aimed at a techier crowd then Ubuntu.

      Me, I like slackware or debian. But I recommend Ubuntu to my firends and family that don't know or care what "a linux" is. I think that's the appeal of Ubuntu. It's got some Debian in it at the bottom so when I have to support I'm comfortable. My mom likes it because it works and she doesn't have to call me as much anymore becuase her computer is "acting slow".

      You are probably at "power user" status or beyond if you are running three OS's on one machine so if you have invested some time and emotion in Gentoo and it works well for you then you probably aren't really missing anything available in another distro.

      People rail on and on here and elsewhere about how the Linux Community needs to come together and pick a distro, get their shit together and market Linux properly, etc... For the sake of people like you and me, I sure hope that never happens. I like choice and freedom, lot's of it!

      --
      Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
    15. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by joib · · Score: 1

      I'm in a similar situation. I had been using debian since 1997, but I got really annoyed at the ever lengthening release cycles, and I didn't want to use testing or unstable either due to periodic breakage.

      Actually, my current Ubuntu system is a direct descendant of the original debian I installed in 1997. I have *never* reinstalled the system; tells something about the quality of debian and apt-get dist-upgrade! When getting new hardware it's just much simpler to cp -a the existing system, edit fstab and the grub config, than to reinstall.

      Oh, and my parents are nowadays also happy Ubuntu users. ;-)

    16. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by ShibaInu · · Score: 1

      Package updates were my favorite feature of Ubuntu. Unfortuantely, on my HP, the clock ran 2x fast and the machine hung every few days. So, I switched over to FC4 and later FC5.

      I do think Ubuntu is forcing other distros into better package and update management. FC4 had pretty terrible features out of the box, but FC5 is a lot better. So, while not everyone loves Ubuntu, they've been a factor in increasing usablity.

    17. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by manWorkSucks · · Score: 1
      >> *what am I missing* by not using Ubuntu?

      the two weeks it took to setup and compile your system, among other things.

      --
      NERDS!!!!
    18. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by FhnuZoag · · Score: 1

      A big and supportive community. Everything follows from that, really.

    19. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by wirelessbuzzers · · Score: 1

      Yeah, more or less agreement here, although I found some bugs and things requiring fiddling. I installed the upgrade on two machines, my laptop and my desktop.

      Worked out of the box:
      - Laptop integrated video.
      - Sound.
      - Sleep and hibernate. Dapper is the first non-Windows OS I've tried that could do both of these; previous Linux versions I'd tried lost data on sleep. Better updating when waking up (eg, laptop doesn't think it's still plugged in after waking up).
      - CPU frequency scaling.
      - Most Toshiba magic buttons: power, lid, mute, sleep, hibernate, external, brightness, wireless, keypad.
      - Trackpad scrollwheel emulation.
      - Network drivers, wireless and wired.
      - Boot splash. Totally unneccessary, I know, but pretty.
      - Update notifications. Aptful shiny.
      - All that Gnome shiny we know and love.
      - USB, firewire, automounting.

      Required fiddlement:
      - Networking system doesn't autodetect which interface might have link, requiring "sudo ifup eth1" to bring up secondary (wired) interface.
      - Installer didn't work first time around on my laptop.
      - Braille terminal installed by default, adds unneccessary carping in system logs.
      - Different version of Unison synchronizer in apt; the old version should still be there since it's stable and requires same version.
      - Desktop (nVidia) binary video drivers.
      - "Human" theme is hella ugly.

      Still not working:
      - All them weird video codecs. WMV, RM, etc.
      - Toshiba trackpad-off control, screen lock, media controls, processor frequency, probably a few other ones. Haven't really tried to get these working.

      Bugs:
      - Two screensaver pref panels. Sometimes they interfere wrt display sleep.
      - Icon cacheing bug in menus.
      - Occasional dumb package dependencies.
      - PS1='\[\e]2;...\]' cursor bug in bash/terminal emulator/something.

      --
      I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
    20. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by !equal · · Score: 1

      File a bug report!

    21. Re:What does Ubuntu have... by Orrin+Bloquy · · Score: 0, Troll
      I like that I installed dapper and everything worked. I don't mean "it booted to a desktop and I needed minimal fiddling to get my camera working, oh and sometimes sound drops out but I got that fixed in half an hour... and I can't use my music player yet cos it won't mount", I mean I can install it and there's everything working and working well.

      Well, except for zeroconf's daemon, codec support for the examples in the Examples folder, fully enabled repositories, a Firefox which has enough privileges to permit 1.5.0.2 to load itself, rhythmbox being actually able to play MP3s, and a wider choice of fonts besides the DejaVu/Bitstream families and Gurbhunktivar mud-hut glyphset, yeah, Dapper Flight 6's right out of the box, it is.

      --
      "Made up/misattributed quote that makes me look smart. I am on /. and I must look smart."
  5. Why Ubuntu wins for me.... by danpsmith · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One word: community. Anything that you can think of you can find a guide for for the most part, just by Googling. The chat has to be one of the only friendly ones I've seen in the linux community and the boards/wiki are impeccable. They didn't attempt to make me feel like a moron just for not knowing something, and they didn't feel I needed to be pressured into using Linux for every application, just supporting the cause and attempting to learn was enough. I've been waiting for dapper drake to take flight for a while nos so I can get my hands on XGL and get it actually working permanently on a computer. I might have to try out the beta early now that a beta has finally been released.

    --
    Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
    1. Re:Why Ubuntu wins for me.... by JohnGrahamCumming · · Score: 1

      The community is the answer on Ubuntu. And it's interesting because from the outset the Ubuntu folks stated that they wanted to make a friendly distro and it's paid off in terms of how the community operates. I was a really long time Windows user who started with DOS, went to Windows with 3.0 (and remember how 'great' 3.11 was) all the way up to XP.

      I finally got tired of Windows crap and decide to go all FOSS and switched my laptop to Linux. First distro I used was SuSE. I bought it just before Novell bought them out and I'd chosen SuSE because RedHat had gone all corporate and it looked like SuSE was more oriented to the end user. It was an OK experience. A bunch of stuff didn't work but hey, that's Linux for you, and searching or posting usually got me answers to questions. Then I switched to Fedora Core 3 because I wanted to be more up to date. SuSE was looking expensive and gone all Novell. The FC3 community was not supportive at all and I had constant crap with the distro.

      Finally I switched to Ubuntu. I was actually afraid to do it because I figured that it might be dumbed down, but it's not. And the community is helpful. The root vs sudo thing was weird at first. And the package management is impeccable.

      John.

  6. Alpha, Beta, or Final? by HavokDevNull · · Score: 2, Insightful

    After reading the story yesterday on /. http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/04/18/ 0047245 I downloaded the latest Alpha (/. says beta Ubuntu say Alpha) And for being Alpha it is very very stable. I got XGL working in less than 3 mins, all codecs, plugins, and java installed in 10 mins, and runs rings around Fedora Core 5. It's as responsive as my Gentoo install, seems to me anyway.

    I'm very very impressed, IMHO Mark and the Ubuntu gang are going places in hurry if they keep this up. So the question that comes to my mind now is, would I install this on my mom's computer for her to use 24/7? My answer is I don't t think I would on this release (flight 6) but I will as soon as the final comes out in June, and that's

    --
    Sig
    1. Re:Alpha, Beta, or Final? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      Those terms mean different things to different groups. In the case of Ubuntu as far as I can tell "Alpha" means "We haven't finalized on features yet", "Beta" means "We've finalized on features but need to finish testing". That an Alpha could be quite stable isn't suppirising since most code isn't being written from scratch but is just packaging of other software.

      When you are developing software from scratch, those can take on different meanings. Even if you use the same general points of demarcation (beta being the point of feature completness) the level of bugs can be very different. It's one thing to test something when what you are doing is integrating things that are already released and tested, it's another when you are making stuff from scratch. In the case of a program you are writing, it's not a question of testing to see if there's bugs, it's a matter of eliminating the ones you know there are.

    2. Re:Alpha, Beta, or Final? by ElleyKitten · · Score: 1

      (/. says beta Ubuntu say Alpha)

      Ubuntu tells me it's a beta when I log in (splash screen says Ubuntu Dapper Beta). Maybe you accidently downloaded an old version? The beta is downloadable here.

      --
      "What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
    3. Re:Alpha, Beta, or Final? by HavokDevNull · · Score: 1

      I might of but did an update/upgrade and saw what you saw before I changed my splash ;) Got to love xorg 7 and XGL/Compiz.

      Cheers,
      Styles

      --
      Sig
  7. I'd download it... by mypalmike · · Score: 4, Funny

    But I'm still waiting for the last Ubuntu release to finish compiling on my computer!!!

    Oh, wait... Wrong distro joke.

    --
    There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
  8. Eewy GUI by BoredWolf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When did techies decide that the GUI was the most important aspect of an OS? What keeps us from identifying the benefits of the 2.6.15-r6 kernel (such as SATA RAID support)? We need to stop identifying the pecking-order by how slick an interface looks. I'm sure some people are tingling with anticipation that they'll have "caramel colored theme", but it would be more useful to detail the benefits of switching. Even on the Ubuntu site, the seem to be more focused on a Graphical Shutdown for a "more professional and user friendly feel overall". If you're trying to reinvent Windows, go right ahead. If you want a streamlined, efficient, and powerful OS that will appeal to converts and linux zealots alike, start pushing something other than Gnome's 'Windows XP feel'. Those of us that know linux know there are many GUIs out there for our enjoyment, and regurgitating old news about an interface that is independent of your distro doesn't pique my interest. People need something to differentiate Ubuntu from every other distro out there. I can put Gnome on my linux box, but that doesn't make Gentoo into Ubuntu. Let people know why they should opt for Ubuntu instead of RedHat or YellowDog...

    --
    "Bad times have a scientific value. These are occasions a good learner would not miss." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
    1. Re:Eewy GUI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The techies did not decide that the user interface is the most important part of the OS. The other 97% of the world did that years ago. The ubuntu people are the first ones to believe them. Computers did not catch on until they were accessible to normal people that didn't want to spend hours learning how to use them.

      If you want all the features and none of the usability, fine. Just don't ever complain about how the man page sucks and you can't get it set up properly.

    2. Re:Eewy GUI by nmos · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When did techies decide that the GUI was the most important aspect of an OS? What keeps us from identifying the benefits of the 2.6.15-r6 kernel (such as SATA RAID support)?

      Probably because anyone who knows what a kernel is can install whatever one they want on any distro. A really pollished (not just pretty but actually works right) GUI is a lot harder to graft on to a distro that doesn't already have it.

    3. Re:Eewy GUI by mixmasta · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because it is the only thing left to do on Linux.

      Technically it is mostly finished, but lots of work still needs to be done to improve ease of use. Hence, that's where the excitement is.

      --
      #6495ED - cornflower blue
    4. Re:Eewy GUI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Believe it or not, most people just want their computers to work. That's what a slick GUI does. None of the potential converts Ubuntu is going after care about the latest SATA RAID drivers.

  9. Check out the review at madpenguin by Onymous+Hero · · Score: 1

    Madpenguin recently had a really good review of some of the new features in 6.0.6.

    http://tinyurl.com/j3hyq

  10. just try to use torrents please by muletool · · Score: 1

    Sure the torrents are great 4kb/sec down 35kb/sec up. Maybe it will finish before the next release.

    --
    Can I bum you a .sig?
    1. Re:just try to use torrents please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give it a moment to ramp up, man. Either that, or your pipes are too thin. I'm currently pulling 900+ kB/sec (yes bytes, not bits).

    2. Re:just try to use torrents please by Lordpidey · · Score: 1

      900KB/s? Thats probably why he is only getting 4KB/s (bandwith hog)

      --
      Some people encrypt by using rot-13 twice. I prefer the more secure method of using rot-1 a total of twenty six times.
  11. Re:What does Ubuntu have... n00bs are good stuff by From+A+Far+Away+Land · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The thing that makes Ubuntu the distro to have is that it has a growing "n00b base". This benefits experienced Linux users, because if they are running the same distro as the people they will end up supporting, then the Linux community as a whole becomes stronger and easier for people to get into. Wouldn't it be nice to run the same system as everyone else you know, and still be using Linux?

    --
    Oh You POS
  12. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Modded +1 for the word "flabbergasted"

  13. See Debian. by matt+me · · Score: 2, Insightful

    To comparing Ubuntu to say Fedora Core, you have to look behind the sticky smiley usable faces and compare the old clockwork beneath of Debian against Red Hat. I think the biggest answers here are a) speed and b) .deb package management. I use Fedora Core, and it is officially a beast, and managing .rpm's through yum isn't perfect.

    But the real differences aren't in the software. It's the attitude and community. Ubuntu loves you. Ubuntu is your friend. It smiles when you see it on the street. Those behind Ubuntu hav the right attitude, although sometimes a little patronising, it is one that *will* make *something* happen. This great, I think we can trust Ubuntu not to become hypocritically evangelical and sell out like Firefox.

    AOB: Hell! My easter egg's dissapeared from within foil. Tell me I didn't just eat it...

    1. Re:See Debian. by Bromskloss · · Score: 1
      I think we can trust Ubuntu not to become hypocritically evangelical and sell out like Firefox.
      Oo, that sounds interesting. Could you explain, please?
      AOB: Hell! My easter egg's dissapeared from within foil. Tell me I didn't just eat it...
      I.. *aouhmf*... sorry!
      --
      Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
    2. Re:See Debian. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By hypocritically evangelical he most certainly means about:mozilla

    3. Re:See Debian. by matt+me · · Score: 1

      Hah maybe I sell out in trying to be controversial. But no I do have some real opinions on Firefox that usually get modded out of side. Here they arel, following my story.

      In 2003 , back when I used Windows, and wasn't that geeky at all, I installed an 'alternative' browser at hte recommendation of my brother. This was Firebird 0.7. I liked it. It was faster than IE. He showed me how to use the tabs (using TBE) and how it blocked ads (adblock). I was impressed by the good many geeky features that made it useful - find as you type, style sheet changing, the search bar, clever bookmarks, easy restoring of tabs.

      I thought this was a brilliant browser for geeks. And each version was an improvement, despite change in name.

      I got caught up in the excitement. How Firefox 1.0 was going to be amazing and everyone would use it. Then around the 1.0 prerelease (sep 2004) things start to go wrong. I think this is explained best in the stylesheet changer issue. If you remember the old Firebird, down in the bottom right there was a button on websites to change stylesheets for those that had alternate ones avaliable. This is almost forgotten now as a result.

      What happende. The firefox devs proposed removnig geeky features - this switcher, work offline the javascript console and even view source to supposedly make it easier for IE users to switch. There was firefox user outrage read http://blog.codefront.net/archives/2004/08/25/no-a lternate-stylesheet-switcher-in-firefox-10/ http://glazman.org/weblog/dotclear/index.php?2004/ 08/24/513-is-firefox-going-nuts-or-what and even asa (sensible firefox dev) was unhappy http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/006265 .html

      After extreme public outrage. They put the switcher back in. Between 1.0 PR and 1.0 See http://blog.codefront.net/archives/2004/09/11/alte rnate-stylesheet-ui-is-back-in-firefox/ Other geeky things were kept we thought.

      But that wasn't true. 1.0 shipped without the stylesheet changer, but they got away with it, becauuse we were caught up in the hysteria. The decision to target IE users over their old userbase had been made. I don't know if you've used an out-the-box Firefox, but it's not much fun. It acts like IE. No single-window mode, (tabs + windows is ridiculously confusing), find as you type disabled, giant IE like buttons, links underline etc...

      It was the change of target chosen by Mozilla from the powered user to the convert IE users on Windows. That doesn't mean you have to reproduce IE in everyway. Disabling find as you type, tabs by default. Even rearranging the buttons. IE users aren't dumb. They can cope with change.

      The evangelical thing gets to me. Spreadfirefox preaches only to the converted. It's not about the freedom of choice GNU but about destroying competition. They'd promote Firefox over any other alternate browser, encouraging sites to support Firefox, not to support standards.

      And even though I really hadn't got into Linux then. I see another sell out here. Mozilla was about Linux. It came as the default suite on many a distro. Then windows bugs became a priority - 1.0 for linux was a mess.

      Do you know animal farm? Or the russian revolution. How we're promised everything, only for values to be sold out, to arrive at hypocrisy, and perhaps no better than what we had before.

    4. Re:See Debian. by Hast · · Score: 1

      Is the stylesheet changer the same as that found in View->Page Style? If so I imagine it wouldn't be too hard to put it back in like you remember it with an extention. If it hasn't been done already.

      I still think FF is the Browser with the most geeky features. It's just that they put them as extentions instead so it doesn't flood the browser with features.

    5. Re:See Debian. by Bromskloss · · Score: 1
      First of all I'd like to thank you for taking time in answering, explaining the issue to me. I too hopped on the train with Firebird 0.7 (as I recall it), but apparently did not pay attention to details the way you did.
      No single-window mode, (tabs + windows is ridiculously confusing)
      I totally agree! I _don't_ want web pages to fling up windows in my face against my will. Not tabs either, for that matter, but it's better than new windows. I do arrange my tabs in multiple windows sometimes, though, when I have a lot of them. But it's _my_ choice. (And I would like to be able to move tabs between windows.)
      find as you type disabled
      I've always thought this would be a great feature for new users to accidentally discover by tapping a key by mistake. It's extremely useful, I don't understand either why it's not on by default.
      giant IE like buttons
      Ah, are they really that giant (in Firefox, that is)? I think it's easier to hit the big ones quickly, actually. However, I remove all buttons anyway -- using mouse gestures for "back" and "forward" and keyboard or menus for everything else.
      links underline
      Oh, haha, never thought about that.
      Even rearranging the buttons.
      Really? I'm afraid I didn't notice this either. But does it really matter?
      It's not about the freedom of choice GNU but about destroying competition. They'd promote Firefox over any other alternate browser, encouraging sites to support Firefox, not to support standards.
      Hmm, yes, I too believe free software in general, and following the standards, are the important things. On the other hand, I think promoting a good candidate (to use instead of a proprietary one) is a good thing too. But of course I don't want to look down on other free browsers! I haven't personally gotten very much in touch with the spreading actions, so I haven't thought much about it.
      Do you know animal farm? Or the russian revolution. How we're promised everything, only for values to be sold out, to arrive at hypocrisy, and perhaps no better than what we had before.
      Yes I do know it, and this is really funny. Just _yesterday_ I, for some reason, came to think of it and the similarity with the Soviet Union struck me! I, probably for the fist time, though that mabye there was a _specific_ historical event that inspired the book, and mabye it was the forming of the Soviet Union. Haha, stupid of me. I must have been to young to realize it when I read it. It's of course sad if that's what you feel you have to compare Firefox to, and I would like to encourage you by pointing out that it still is free software and even apart from that is much better than Microsoft's competitor.

      I wish you a nice day!
      --
      Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
    6. Re:See Debian. by matt+me · · Score: 1

      Firstly is there an extension?

      The current implementation is useless, because you don't know *if* there is an alternate stylesheet avaliable, because there's no visible icon. No-one goes to habitually look in view /page style to see.

    7. Re:See Debian. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kinda off topic, but a FireFox-like browser I really like is Galeon. I never used the old Firebird, but from your description it sounds a lot like Galeon. Since TFA was about Ubuntu, to install it hit "sudo apt-get install galeon". It's what I use on my system as my primary browser.

      I'm posting as AC because I'm not on my home system, and forgot my password, lol.

    8. Re:See Debian. by Hast · · Score: 1

      I don't know if there is an extention. I really don't care about the feature so I haven't looked.

      I imagine if there isn't one you could use GreaseMonkey to hack something together which would show (on the page) if there were alternative presentations available.

      Good hunting, and I'd look at web developer plugins as well. They may have the functionality built in.

  14. Re:What is with this by E.+Edward+Grey · · Score: 1
    First of all, there are lots of reasons people like Ubuntu. It's based on Debian, which you'll note was Slashdot's Favorite Linux-based OS v1.0. Therefore it solves a lot of the problems people have with Linux software installation, such as package-dependency hell and app-version mismatches. But it's also geared toward the average Linux desktop user, which makes it cohesive and focused on desktop stability.

    Secondly, Ubuntu does not "use" gnome. It uses whatever desktop environment you wish to have. It just happens to come with gnome by default. And if you're like Linus and you see no reason anyone should not use KDE, there are two ways to get it:

    1. apt-get it

    2. Download Kubuntu instead, which is just Ubuntu with KDE.

    --

    ---don't make me break out my red pen.

  15. Just updated... by gsasha · · Score: 1

    I've been running Dapper since Flight 4 on my laptop. Impressive (while some things not working yet... bug reports submitted). I've just updated, but haven't seen any changes today

  16. Ubuntu-Server, no GUI needed. by khasim · · Score: 1
    When did techies decide that the GUI was the most important aspect of an OS?
    I'm probably a "techie" and I don't believe that the GUI is the most important part.

    But with Ubuntu, I can install a "server" version and skip the GUI.

    Or I can do a regular install and get a nice GUI. This is great for workstations.

    With Ubuntu, you no longer need to choose between "stable system" and "nice GUI". You get them BOTH.
    I'm sure some people are tingling with anticipation that they'll have "caramel colored theme", but it would be more useful to detail the benefits of switching.
    The benefits of switching depend upon the platform you are switching from.

    Red Hat to Ubuntu gives one set of benefits.

    Debian to Ubuntu gives a different set of benefits.

    SuSE to Ubuntu gives another set of benefits.

    There isn't one single "best" distribution. The closest we can get is the most "popular" distribution.
    If you're trying to reinvent Windows, go right ahead. If you want a streamlined, efficient, and powerful OS that will appeal to converts and linux zealots alike, start pushing something other than Gnome's 'Windows XP feel'.
    If you're looking at converting Windows users, then using an interface that they're familiar with is an easy first step.

    Once they're a bit more comfortable, you can make Ubuntu look a lot like OS X. Nice eye-candy.
    Let people know why they should opt for Ubuntu instead of RedHat or YellowDog...
    But there is no real reason for them to. I use Ubuntu because, for me, Ubuntu gives me the most of what I want and use with the minumum of what I dislike.

    If you're running Red Hat because of the Oracle support, then Ubuntu isn't a good choice for you ... yet.

    It all comes down to individual choices based on their desires and dislikes.

    I was running Debian on my servers. I've been migrating them because I now use Ubuntu on the desktop. My desktop needs are different from my server needs, but Ubuntu gave me everything that Debian had on the server, and I could save a bit of work by using it on servers and workstations.
    1. Re:Ubuntu-Server, no GUI needed. by BoredWolf · · Score: 1
      Obviously, my point has been overlooked. What I am trying to say is: Ubuntu has failed to differentiate itself from any other distro. People know there are a plethora of distributions out there, but those distributions completely fail to state their most basic purpose.
      But there is no real reason for them to. I use Ubuntu because, for me, Ubuntu gives me the most of what I want and use with the minumum of what I dislike. If you're running Red Hat because of the Oracle support, then Ubuntu isn't a good choice for you ... yet. It all comes down to individual choices based on their desires and dislikes.
      How is your average convert going to make these choices, without any real information to guide them? You might talk about your likes and dislikes, but that is because you know about other distributions. New users aren't going to install 5 distros just to figure out which one they like. They're going to go with one, and probably stick with it whether they love it or hate it, because they don't know any better. They need functionality, and many distro sites are devoid of any such information. Their own website skims over what most intelligent users would find to be the most vital information, instead focusing on features that many users could install third-party or easily hack-together with a little googling. I'm a sucker for pain and suffering, so I use Gentoo. Everyone knows (or thinks) its a pain-in-the-ass to build, but runs like a dream once you actually have a functioning kernel and don't do anything stupid. Portage is sweet, I can use virtually any FS I like, there's experimental support for lots of crazy stuff... Why can't there be a little page like this for every distro? Otherwise, the only difference between your distro and the other guy's is that it has a caramel-colored theme and a different name.
      --
      "Bad times have a scientific value. These are occasions a good learner would not miss." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
  17. Re:What does Ubuntu have... n00bs are good stuff by gumpish · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't it be nice to run the same system as everyone else you know, and still be using Linux?

    Yes. Yes, it would.

    (Proudly answering rhetorcal questions for 29 years.)

  18. Still shipping unstable CVS dumps as packages ? by yattaran · · Score: 1

    Do they still ship with CVS dumps as packages ?

    Last time I checked on Breezy Badger they were still including packages from CVS dumps.

    As an example:
    The Ruby 1.8.3 package which comes with Breezy Badger was a CVS dump from several months before Ruby 1.8.3 was released. No wonder it worked like shit. The really wierd thing is they called it 1.8.3 when it in fact was just a CVS dump. Almost a year later and they still hadn't updated it.

    Proof:
    $ ruby --version
    ruby 1.8.3 (2005-06-23) [i486-linux]

    Ruby 1.8.3 was released on 2005-09-21 (see http://www.ruby-lang.org/)

    How can you trust a distro when it doesn't even have up-to-date stable packages ?
    Not that I care since I try to run the latest version of everything, but others probably do.

    Wonder how many other packages they got from CVS.

    1. Re:Still shipping unstable CVS dumps as packages ? by CableModemSniper · · Score: 1

      1.8.3 has some bugs anyway, use 1.8.2 or 1.8.4

      --
      Why not fork?
    2. Re:Still shipping unstable CVS dumps as packages ? by yattaran · · Score: 1

      Sure that's an option, but for Ubuntuists there are no Ruby 1.8.2 or 1.8.4 package yet. You can of course compile it yourself, but then the whole point of using a package system is lost. Maybe there's a package for Dapper (haven't checked) but not Badger. 1.8.4 has been out for more than 6 months. That's what I call an outdated distro.

    3. Re:Still shipping unstable CVS dumps as packages ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Dapper, CUPS is some random revision checked out of the SVN repository from a few months ago. It also happens to not work at all with KDE's print system, so printing in Kubuntu is effectively broken.

    4. Re:Still shipping unstable CVS dumps as packages ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've also noticed problems printing via smb.

      That said, the cvs dumps are not nessecarily a bad thing. Built in madwifi support is nice.

  19. Here is the real Non-spammer address by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://madpenguin.org/cms/index.php/?m=show&id=669 9

    Go get your pagehits somewhere else.

  20. filename says beta by Xtifr · · Score: 1

    According to btdownloadcurses, the name of the file I'm currently downloading is: "ubuntu-6.06-beta-live-i386.iso". From that, I would have to say that it looks like Ubuntu considers this a beta, and slashdot got it right. Don't look so startled! It can happen! :)

    I am going to be installing this on my aunt's machine, but only because she's going to be in town next week, and won't be in June. I'd rather wait, but sometimes one has to strike while the iron is hot. I expect it to be a major improvement over the out-of-date and harder-to-upgrade Linux distro she was using. I will be configuring her sshd to accept connections from my box (and not from the rest of the world), so I can do remote admin if necessary.

  21. Graphical Installer by stu42j · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It looks like the "new spiffy graphical installation" only works under the LiveCD. Perhaps the Ubuntu folks should work with the Debian folks to finish the gtk frontend for d-i. That way they could have a "real" graphical installer.

    http://wiki.debian.org/DebianInstaller/GUI

    1. Re:Graphical Installer by GauteL · · Score: 1

      Personally I think the LiveCD should take over as the standard distribution mechanism. Let people preview before they install and make the install as simple as possible.

      The traditional method of installation should be available for techies, but these hardly need a shiny interface with icons and buttons.

      There is nothing wrong with a text based installer as long as it is well done.

    2. Re:Graphical Installer by punkrockguy318 · · Score: 1

      The idea is to concatanate the LiveCD and the install disk. If your installing a desktop system, you only need one disk, rather than two. The installation disk is for servers, minimal installs, or OEM/auto installations. This really simplifies things with Ubuntu's ShipIt, which sends free CDs to anyone.

  22. Re:What is with this by v3rgEz · · Score: 0

    And now, as I discovered 3 days ago, it has XFCE, which I installed in 10 minutes on my laptop, no hassle, no razzle-dazzle.
    Smooth.

  23. notification - wtf by matt+me · · Score: 1

    look here (love the url)
    http://www.ubuntu.com/testing/dapperbeta#head-c56a 98f3cc839f858104f654c0f6900908721f73

    it's the notification section. gnome 2.14 has a sexy new notification box at last. there's a message saying updates are avaliable. and then it says 'a restart is required' what's that about. when do you ever need to do that in linux? obviously if you want to boot into a newer kernel, but i wouldn't recommend rebooting JUST for that. wait till you next turn on tomorrow. any other application is the new version when you run it, and you can restart X without rebooting. madness...

    also they should real help us by aclling it rebooting. not restarting. that doesn't mean anything.

    1. Re:notification - wtf by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      kernel upgrades/fixes

      that is the only time i have ever seen that message since i've been using ubuntu (almost a yr).

    2. Re:notification - wtf by mbrubeck · · Score: 2, Informative

      The reboot option is displayed only for kernel updates, as you suggested. Users of released Ubuntu versions receive updates only to fix security holes and other critical bugs, so it's probably a good idea to recommend that they reboot into the new kernel as soon as possible.

  24. Re:Cannot resist by rduke15 · · Score: 1

    Redundant/Flamebait/Troll and all, yes, I know... but ...

    Wouldn't it be nice to run the same system as everyone else you know

    Don't know, but around 90% of the users seem to agree with you...

  25. Ubuntu for the masses by teklob · · Score: 1

    My moms hard drive sh!t itself the other day, so after we got a new one I offered to put Linux on it for her. She's a total novice, so I used Hoary as opposed to Dapper, but so far its doing everything she needs: Firefox, Thunderbird, Frozen-Bubble, and even FirstClass, her school district's email/groupware client has a linux beta available. Slowly, Linux is penetrating the absolute beginner market.

    1. Re:Ubuntu for the masses by ElleyKitten · · Score: 1

      I WISH I could install Ubuntu on my mom's computer. It would work so much better for her; she wouldn't have to keep buying stupid games like solitaire and majohng that I could just apt-get for her, her printer wouldn't unistall itself everytime she restarts, and I wouldn't have to do anymore anti-virus/spyware sweeps. Of course that last one would be much easier if her company's it dept would stop remoting into her computer and deleting all the anti-spyware programs I install, but you know, people are just morons.

      --
      "What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
  26. Re:What is with this by jonasj · · Score: 1

    If you're an XFCE fan, try installing the xubuntu-desktop package for additional integration, artwork and stuff.

    sudo apt-get install xubuntu-desktop

    --
    You know, Microsoft's street address also says a lot about their mentality.
  27. Just Imagine How the Final Will Turn Out... by alphasubzero949 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've been using Dapper as a primary OS since Flight 5 and have been extremely impressed with the stability, considering the warnings and alpha status. Today was supposed to be the release of the original 6.04 if I am not mistaken (before Shuttleworth announced the delay). If they can iron out whatever small bugs remain in the beta until June 1, imagine how rock solid Dapper is going to be. At this point, when you couple the (almost) ease of use and the large forum community this is as close to LotD as you could get. It won't be long before you begin to see more and more comparisons between OS X, Windows, and Ubuntu. Things are going to become very interesting.

    I have already converted a few to Ubuntu from Windows and even rekindled some PCs that were collecting dust because of FUBARed Windows systems.

  28. Re:Ubuntu for your Mama by Slashcrunch · · Score: 1

    My moms hard drive sh!t itself the other day, so after we got a new one I offered to put Linux on it for her. She's a total novice, so I used Hoary as opposed to Dapper, but so far its doing everything she needs: Firefox, Thunderbird, Frozen-Bubble, and even FirstClass, her school district's email/groupware client has a linux beta available. Slowly, Linux is penetrating the absolute beginner market.

    I know theres a joke here somewhere, I just can't quite connect... Linux... penetrating... your mama... Hmmm. (Sorry, I couldn't help it! How immature of me :)

    Seriously though, Ubuntu is very impressive. 6.06 will be installed on my Mother's machine once it reaches final. She's running FC2 at the moment but its time for an upgrade. FC2 still does all she wants but its time for some new bells and whistles. Since running Linux she has been impressed that she is the only one of her out of all her friends that doesn't get knocked out by the latest virus or trojan, and I don't need to fix her machine all the time. YAY!

  29. Not quite so good. by Grendel+Drago · · Score: 1

    If the developers pick up a report on Malone, it'll get dealt with quite quickly. However, if they don't, it can linger for months in 'Unconfirmed' status, even if it's trivially reproducible. I've had much better luck filing bugs directly with the GNOME Bugzilla team (for GNOME apps, in any case). The KDE team won't even accept bug reports for the software in Breezy, because they don't support their old releases.

    --
    Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
  30. Where'd that come from? by Grendel+Drago · · Score: 1

    How'd you get that? The version of ruby1.8 from Breezy is 1.8.2; Dapper uses 1.8.4. What does 'dpkg -l ruby1.8' say?

    --
    Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
    1. Re:Where'd that come from? by yattaran · · Score: 1

      ~$ dpkg -l ruby1.8
      ruby1.8 1.8.2-9ubuntu1 Interpreter of object-oriented scripting lan

      ~$ ruby --version
      ruby 1.8.3 (2005-06-23) [i486-linux]

      I've read several places that this is a CVS version.

      "When I pulled the Ruby package out of Breezy and built it, it was a 1.8.3 CVS
      build. This is yet another pre-release package. I don't think the updated Ruby
      package has made it to backports yet. I've been checking every couple of hours
      now. If and when the package does make it into backports I hope and pray that
      it's a 1.8.2 stable build and not something that was thrown together out of CVS
      like what I've already seen."
      https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+source/ruby1 .8/+bug/18876

      "...doesn't work if you're running Ubuntu 5.10 (and I'm guessing Debian sarge) because they have a heavily patched 1.8.2 version of ruby (from CVS) that reports itself as 'ruby 1.8.3 (2005-06-23) [i486-linux]'..."
      http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/2263