Slashdot Mirror
OpenSUSE 11.0 Released
Nate D writes "It's here: a new major release of Novell's community-supported distro is now available, and can be downloaded from the mirrors. Linux Format has a hands-on look at the new installer, SLAB menu and Compiz Fusion, and weighs up whether the distro can fight competition from Ubuntu and Fedora. Is this the start of a new era for SUSE?"
I will not use it on my box. I will not use it with a fox.
My blog
Folks, please download it via BitTorrent:
http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/11.0/iso/torrent/openSUSE-11.0-DVD-i386.torrent
I think most of the downloads are being done selfishly via HTTP or FTP, as I've been in the swarm for almost 1h and the speeds are quite low, there are only 60 peers.
http://www.thecodingstudio.com/opensource/linux/screenshots/index.php?linux_distribution_sm=openSUSE%2011.0
I've used all three (U, F, & S) and keep going back to SuSE because of the SuSEfirewall2 configuration feature. It gives you one straightforward (fairly) easy to understand text config file that governs how the iptables rules get set up.
The Yast system manager is pretty good too, especially the software management section, but then again Ubuntu's Synaptic and apt-get from Debian totally rocks too! I'd love to have OpenSuSE with both Yast and Synaptic together, but I'm too lazy to try to install the Debian tools into SuSE so I'll just use whatever software manager that comes with whatever distro I'm presently using.
Oops, run kid
mov ax,4c00h
int 21h
Shame the review didn't use KDE, as that's the good point about SUSE as far as I am concerned.
No, you can choose Gnome, KDE3, KDE4, Minimal, and Command-Line. You can also manually select/deselect packages that will be installed. Hell, you can even add other media/repositories for use at that point. (think of actually using aptitude when installing debian/ubuntu, and having the debian-multimedia repo available at initial install)
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
At the risk of being labeled a troll, I typically tell colleagues who ask about the Microsoft deal that Apple has numerous patent and other technology licensing agreements with Microsoft, and yet we don't see a groundswell of people on Slashdot calling Apple on the carpet for their Microsoft agreements.
:-)
:-(. Please be nice!)
In response, I've heard that the difference is that Apple doesn't pretend to be fully open-source whereas Novell does to an extent, though Apple does have an open-source kernel and other bits in addition to a proprietary system. Similarly, Novell's SuSE (not openSuSE) is a product that users typically need to pay for. From a high-level view, this looks like both companies offer a proprietary system as well as an open-source subset of that proprietary system.
As a result -- at least, from that simplification of the issue -- I think that anti-SuSE people on Slashdot are treating Novell unfairly versus Apple. I'm not a fan of the Microsoft deal, either, but I do like openSuSE on technical and, especially, usability grounds, and that is why I both advocate for and use it both at home and at work.
Now I'm off to download the latest version
(there goes my karma, though
Yea, because by running OSX, you're clearly a saint when it comes to free vs proprietary software.
Well, functionality?
.NET 3.0 . Where is the Linux version so people having same functionality as Windows will run?
Lets see... Nokia just shipped "Nokia Maps Downloader" application which is not absolutely photoshop class complex application. It is coded in
Look to REAL WORLD, not some Mono blogs or Mono clone coders friends applications who are hosted at Novell themselves.
"I thought, ... chances are a linux box doesnt need a firewall"
Firewalls arent always used just for inbound attacks, what about using it as an adblocker, or maybe you only want certain computers in a network to communicate, or maybe you are just a little overly paranoid...
Besides, as Linux popularity grows, it will necessitate the need for more firewalls/security, especially with recent blunders with Flash, et al, there will be more of those aswell...
Tell me why that deal matters exactly? Because Microsoft gave them money? Because you can read into the agreement things that aren't there (admission that Microsoft owns the patents to some GPL code). They gave up nothing, they give a lot back to the linux community, they provide the best packaging for KDE (in fact i'd say they're the de facto KDE distribution). This bitterness towards them needs to stop, they easily give the linux community as much as the Ubuntu project does.
If something is coded in a true multiplatform framework, it ships on _every_ platform that Framework supports. Mono gang is just being abused by Microsoft to claim their junk is multiplatform.
Want to see a multi platform framework? http://azureus.sourceforge.net/
If Nokia had brain to use a true multiplatform framework, that "Maps downloader" could work inside ANY BROWSER of ANY OS. It is so sad that MS manages to trap people even in age of 2008. Of course, some must be clever and get paid for it. I am worried about the actual naive ones thinking MS would produce or let produce anything equal to their pyramid scheme named Windows.
If you're interested in running a non-KDE desktop, have you considered Xubuntu? It's the Ubuntu variant with the lighter-weight Xfce desktop. I run it on a 600Mhz Pentium III laptop with 128MB of RAM, and it works quite well (be sure to grab the "alternate install" disk if you're running with as little RAM as I am).
I had no issues with the non-standard desktop components on my laptop working out-of-the-box, but of course YMMV here. Wireless, sound, etc.
If Xfce is not light enough, you can always install fluxbox, wmaker, etc, all available from the offical apt repositories.
So yes - perhaps all features are available for all distros. But not all are actually implemented/moved to another distro. Most corporate users like the way YAST (packet manager) is working, and they also enjoy some of the built-in features for central management and integration with infrastructure products widely used in Enterprises.
Simply put: SUSE has more focus on Enterprise needs, and less focus on whistles and bells (in GUI and elsewhere). An even though many of these features COULD be moved/ported to other distros, they are not. For the simple reasons that users of these distros are not needing or requesting them.
On the other hand distros like Ubuntu has a much nicer appeal to consumer-type end-users. It looks more familiar to them , than SUSE and has a more appealing look'n'feel.
- Jesper
My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
Apple made a big stink about patents a number of years ago wrt spring-loaded folders in the Nautilus file manager.
Apple has also purposely broken the iPod database so that Free Software iPod software broke after the update.
Apple also have a similar deal with Microsoft as Novell has.
I know, I know... "Apple shiny. Me like shiny" makes it all better, right? Whatever.
Firewalls are 100% useless against Flash, which loads via outbound HTTP just like the rest of your web content. I recommend disabling Flash entirely or using an open source implementation like swfdec (which is only slightly more functional than just disabling Flash :P)
Sam ty sig.
As was already mentioned earlier in this thread, if Nokia's software uses native (rather than managed) libraries to build their .NET 3.0 program, then they clearly didn't care about it being cross-platform.
If they built it purely in managed code and it doesn't work under Mono, then it is just a bug in Mono - file a bug so that we can fix it.
No need to insult us.
I would use original XP or Vista rather than a thing which is made by their cloning partners. At least they are original.
It is sad that you come to such a conclusion without at least evaluating the technical potential of these projects, and perhaps Novells reasons for engaging in them. It sounds almost like you are on a personal crusade against commercial vendors who are in the cross-platform / portability business.
Novell has made it its core business to connect technologies which are for different reasons not already connected. And in most of these cases, the products they connect are either all commercial or a mixture of (F)OSS and classic closed-source commercial software.
While you may disagree with their goals, and be almost religiously in opposition of them, I think they do more good than bad. They ultimately ensure that the customer/consumer has a wider choice in products and technologies, and they are IMHO they key to breaking the monopolistic world domination which certain vendors enjoy.
I frankly don't see why Novells projects (for example Mono and Moonlight) are "bad" while similar cross-platform initiatives (such as WINE and SAMBA) are "good". I think the end user should have the widest range of products to choose from, and any company or community who is engaged in projects which enhance portability and interconnectivity are "good". Especially when they release them under open source licenses - like Novell does.
- Jesper
My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
Where Redhat tried to block CentOS, Novell actively helps people to make their own openSUSE and SUSE based distribution.
Also openSUSE make a clear difference between OSS and things that are NON-OSS. It is then up to the user to decide wether you want to install it or not.
Novell has opend a lot of their code already. Indeed not yet everything. However they are working on that as well.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
openSuSE does equal Novell.
Novell SuSE is the commercial OS that Novell sells while openSuSE is the community edition. Both brought to you by...you guessed it, Novell.
http://www.opensuse.org/
openSuSE is the test bed for new packages and configuration. Once vetted, those changes are moved upstream into Novell SuSE proper.
This is exactly the same way Fedora and RedHat work.
Oh, and as for blocking flash... you can easily use your Firewall to block a certain IP/DNS that distributes Flash based Ads on a specific (black list) basis, there are a lot of things you may need/want to have Flash enabled for...
While you may disagree with their goals, and be almost religiously in opposition of them, I think they do more good than bad. They ultimately ensure that the customer/consumer has a wider choice in products and technologies, and they are IMHO they key to breaking the monopolistic world domination which certain vendors enjoy.
I honestly don't understand why some people believe Novells projects (for example Mono and Moonlight) are "bad" while similar cross-platform initiatives (such as WINE and SAMBA) are "good". I also don't understand why people see IBM's investments in Open Source projects as "good" while Novells are "bad".
In a free market, the users and customers benefit from having the widest range of products to choose from. Any company or community who is engaged in software projects which enhance portability and interconnectivity are "good" the way I see it. Especially when they release them under open source licenses - like Novell does.
Given the allready widespread use of
- Jesper
My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
your boss says "let's try a Linux distro for a while", please, don't suggest OpenSuSE A good recommendation in a corporate setting is always based on a good business case. I would be happy to evaluate your arguments for not choosing SUSE for a company, if they are solid and based on rational arguments.
Untill then I will most certainly recommend SUSE if the business case supports it. And in some cases it will - no questions asked. Novell makes great cross-platform products, so if a company needs, say, a cluster of servers capable of running both J2EE and
Or perhaps we could imagine a company wanting to convert their outdated XP clients with Linux clients in order to postpone hardware upgrades (which would be needed in order to migrate to Vista). Perhaps the ability to show webpages with Silverlight elements was an important criteria? What about browsers capable of showing PDF documents, MS Word documents, Flash content, etc? All these are cross-platform initiatives, and I honestly believe that Linux won't make in into the corporate environment without these.
I don't understand why some people think Novell and their projects (for example Mono and Moonlight) are "bad" while other cross-platform initiatives (such as WINE and SAMBA) are "good". I also fail to see why the same people often argue that IBM's investments in Open Source projects are "good" while Novells are "bad". The discussion about Microsoft/Linux/Novell needs to be elevated to a level where it is based on the same standard you would demand in other more scientific debates. Drop the emotional and irrational arguments. Give me facts and examples from real life.
Users and customers benefit from a free market. It gives them the widest range of products to choose from. Any community or company who is engaged in software projects which enhance portability and interconnectivity are "good" as far as I am concerned. Even more so when they are releases them under open source licenses - like MONO and Moonlight.
- Jesper
My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
I completely agree. The M$/Novell technical agreement is much less of a big deal than the community makes it out to be. So what if they have a patent agreement? It wasn't selling out since it never concerned the kernel, just the utilities used in Linux. That, and M$ has yet to prove any patent violations concerning Linux, which has always led me to believe that it touched more on the directory services issues.
Oh, for the days when sig's didn't have to be cute...hey, wait a sec.
My T22 (P3 900, 256, WiFi) runs openSUSE 10.3 with either KDE 3 or Joe's Window Manager that I discovered by trying out DamnSmallLinux.
Basically all I use my laptop for is running NX to my home machine, so a light fast small desktop is the best solution.
On the compatibility side, I do have to run ndiswrapper to make my Linksys PCMCIA WiFi work, but once it is in, KNetworkManager takes care of all the complicated stuff.
Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
For a Linux lover but amateur, I loved it for it's simplicity and ease of installation.
We figured out a long time ago that it's easier to elect seven judges than to elect 132 legislators.
preditor@<mybox>:~> uname -a
Linux <mybox> 2.6.25.7-PReDiToR #1 Thu Jun 19 04:44:46 BST 2008 i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux
Don't like the openSUSE kernel? Don't use it.
Just like that.
Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
Get a clue before you start whining about OMG TEH MICROSOFTS. I understand that you have a retarded knee-jerk hatred of Microsoft. Carrying that over to Novell (who, might I add, went to bat against SCO--or have you already forgotten that?) because they support Mono, a tool for interoperability that doesn't suck nearly as much as Java, is amazingly retarded.
Novell's business is making systems talk to each other. They don't really care if those systems are closed-source, because people still use them.
You could just as easily look at it the other way: use Mono and there are fewer reasons to have Windows around, because the majority of
I don't understand why Mono is TEH EVIL but WINE and Samba are OK. It makes no fucking sense. Is it because people like Miguel--gasp!--don't view Microsoft as enemies? Because they--GASP!--are willing to work with other people, regardless of what you as a FOSStard think?
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
They give MORE than Ubuntu does. Ubuntu works off of the hard work of the Debian team and enhances UI look and feel. The underpinnings are worked on the Debian and the kernel hackers, et al. Novell is one of the biggest contributers to the kernel, Gnome, KDE and.... THEY are part of the Open Invention Network, who strive to PROTECT F/OSS users from patents.
Apple may make a big stink about patents, but they actually point to the patents they hold. MS just handwaves and spreads FUD.
Only an Apple hater would think Apple would purposefully expend developer time just to break an open source project that undoubtedly sold more iPods.
1. openSUSE doesn't need a new era, it is doing just fine.
2. The Microsoft pact hasn't alienated any of the community that matters. There are fundamentalists that gripe and whine and spit about every intellectual property issue that they *perceive* reduces openness. And there are people who write code. There isn't much overlap at all between the coder and the fundamentalist - so there whining and spitting should just be takes as the meaningless noise that it is.
3. Yast is *extremely* modular and not in the least bit monolithic - one just has to look at the Yast packages to know that. It even has multiple front-ends. This makes as much charge as the people who accuse Evolution of being monolithic (it a highly modular app that consists mostly of cooperating components). Another Yast plus is that it works and coverts almost all configuration issues right down to certificate management. That makes SuSE / openSUSE the only distro with a comprehensive management tool.
Using "Common Sense" is being either to arrogant or to ignorant to ask people who know more about something than you.
The linux kernel... rock solid. But with compiz, gnome, and wine, ... sometimes I end up rebooting because I'm not familiar enough with what to kill and restart.
And then there were none.
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
A lot of the time you can hit "CTRL-ALT-backspace" to restart your GUI.
/etc/init.d you will find a list of services. Google them (or read the documen ... wait, this is Slashdot <grin>) and not only will you gain confidence, but you can maximise your uptime to show off with.
If you take a look in
Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
I have picked Nokia Maps downloader on purpose since it as a 22 MB download results in 70-80 MB .NET 3.0 download which (forget Linux!) doesn't even exist on Windows 2000. The Windows 2000 which you can happily run Java 6 even faster thanks to the less bulk of XP/Vista.
Nobody sees that scheme of Microsoft? If someone at Nokia finally figures their high end customers who owns $400+ smartphones (that can run Maps) doesn't give a shit to how cheap Windows PC is and near 30% of them runs Mac OS X, what is needed? rm -rf NokiaMaps and start from strach since there is no way to run .NET 3 on OS X.
It is actually a pyramid scheme like thing.