Slashdot Mirror


Debian Maintainer Hints At September Release for Lenny

nerdyH writes "The Debian project's maintainer, Luke Claes, announced in an email Saturday that he will freeze the 'testing' or 'Lenny' tree, in preparation for a new stable release of Debian Linux in ... September! The freeze means that open source software developers have only a couple more days to package any applications that they want to be included in the next release of Debian — and by extension, in the inner sanctum source lists of distributions such as Ubuntu that are based on it. After the freeze starts next week, Debian maintainers will turn their attention to 364 release-critical bugs, and half-a-dozen high-priority goals. Given the work to be done, is September really feasible? Lenny always was a little slow getting back to his right place ..."

43 of 117 comments (clear)

  1. Packaging... meh. by AllIGotWasThisNick · · Score: 4, Insightful

    only a couple more days to package any applications that they want to be included in the next release of Debian

    If you've left packaging until the freeze announcement, you don't deserve to be included.

    1. Re:Packaging... meh. by AllIGotWasThisNick · · Score: 5, Funny

      Moderation -1

      100% Overrated

      Sorry. "Frosty piss".

  2. Obligatory "does it matter?" by neapolitan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I run Debian in several capacities -- stable on my work server, and unstable on my personal machine.

    A lot of people are going to (quite accurately, I guess) point out that for anybody running unstable/experimental there is not much to this. I mean, release numbers are soooo 1990's, as a simple apt-get update; apt-get upgrade brings you up to the latest packages. Even experimental seems to lag waaaay behind other bleeding edge distros though (gentoo).

    Of course, the release is more important for new installs or people running stable. I have been very impressed with Debian stable, the SSH bug nonwithstanding.

    As software packages and Linux get more mature, I see the definition of a "release" issue becoming even less important for the non-server / non-corporate user. Continuous upgrades are the way of the future. Even on the M$ side this seems to be true, with their MS office 200x and "automatic upgrades."

    Thoughts?

    --
    Slashdotter, ID #101. UIDs are in binary, right?
    1. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by jchawk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It matters in the sense that it's a way for Debian to release a new installer or move to a new standard for device management, but as a whole it doesn't *really* matter. If you are using "stable" in your sources.list verses the actually release name you'll in all likelihood just upgrade right along to the new release, and probably without much fuss.

      I'm excited either way because I 3 Debian!

    2. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm excited either way because I 3 Debian!

      Well, I 4 Debian so I beat you.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    3. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by AmonEzhno · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I agree that the release idea is a little outdated (especially being a freebsd user myself), however it is nice especially with desktop distributions to get new releases. I gather from your post that you seem to have a pretty good grasp of linux so it is not as much an issue for you or me, but more for the common(?) user. For example in ubuntu most releases indicate a significant change in feature set or update in packages. Most home users are not running unstable, so in all likelihood most users are not going to see the latest and greatest in features (unless they have some distinct need and compile from source); the point being that it is a cause for excitement and something to look forward to, at least in my experience.

      On a side note: congrats to you for using Debian unstable, I have had poor luck in the past :P

    4. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, I 8 Debian and she loved it.

    5. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by Nimey · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I used to use Unstable years back, but thought better of it when a nasty lilo bug rendered my hard drive non-bootable. This would have been in the period between 2.2 and 3.0.

      After that I switched to Testing.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    6. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Threesome?

    7. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by Bob54321 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have to say the man has a point here. Rolling releases can be quite stable but every so often something will break and require you have a bit of knowledge about your system to fix it. Personally, I use Arch Linux and really enjoy using it, but I recommend other "stable" distros to people who want their computer to just work.

      --
      :(){ :|:& };:
    8. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by beav007 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I've never know invalid HTML to crash IE. I don't think I've ever know IE to take any notice of the code at all. From what I've seen, it downloads the page, strips the code, and then throws whatever is left at the screen...

    9. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by wellingj · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Agreed. If you need Unstable you are either a Debian developer, should think about becoming a Debian developer, or better off using Gentoo.

    10. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by yomegaman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The problem with 'testing' is that it doesn't get security updates in a timely way. You have to do some gyrations to get the package out of unstable just that one time or else wait two weeks. That's how it was a few months ago anyway.

      --
      ...wearing a skin-tight topless leather jumpsuit, with cutaway buttocks and transparent crotch panel.
    11. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by benuski · · Score: 5, Informative

      There's now a security repository for testing, just like there is for stable, and the repos are in a default sources.list if you install testing directly. http://secure-testing-master.debian.net/

    12. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by Jurily · · Score: 2, Funny

      or better off using Gentoo.

      I would, but I don't have a quad-core box yet.

    13. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by Jackmn · · Score: 4, Informative

      Use '>' and '<' for '>' and '<', respectively.

    14. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by Darkforge · · Score: 4, Informative

      I've never know invalid HTML to crash IE. I don't think I've ever know IE to take any notice of the code at all. From what I've seen, it downloads the page, strips the code, and then throws whatever is left at the screen...

      It has been known to happen! http://support.microsoft.com/kb/885932 http://support.microsoft.com/kb/811751 http://support.microsoft.com/kb/913788 http://support.microsoft.com/kb/909363

      --

      When I moderate, I only use "-1, Overrated". That way, I never get meta-moderated!

    15. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by LostInTaiwan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You should give Sid another try. I've been running it on my laptop since Woody release and and I'm no where near the level of a developer. I run stable on all my servers but Sid is the only way to go for laptops. Etch is a lot better than Woody, but for personal machines, Sid is even better.

    16. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by zsau · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As for me, of the machines I manage (my own and others in my family), the machines that cause the least troubles and have the happiest users are the ones running Debian Stable. I typically put Debian/testing (by codename) onto new computes as I acquire them, and once testing's become stable, I change them to stable. When I get a new computer, the old one goes to whoever wants it most.

      The changes that happen to testing often bring nice new features with awful icky bugs that I don't really want to deal with, and change much too often to be bothered sorting things out. Stable is absolutely the way to go for home users who have someone who can manage their computer (but wouldn't manage it themselves, no matter what operating it runs), and indeed for anyone but people who want to spend too much time working with their computer instead of on their computer. The only problem is if you buy a new computer after the release it'll never support all your hardware...

      In that spirit, I am excellently pleased a new Stable release will be coming up—and right on time too, because from about October I'll have much less free time to manage my computer.

      --
      Look out!
    17. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by millosh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I am using testing at my servers and unstable/experimental on my desktops and laptops. Actually, in some cases, like TV servers are, I am using there unstable/experimental, too.

      At my old laptop, I installed unstable in late 2004 and ran that until February this year without any significant problem except that for some time I ran Firefox 3beta until it didn't become stable enough to go into Debian unstable (and became Iceweasel) :)

      A week or two ago, after one of apt-get update--apt-get upgrade iterations I've got some (I suppose) Synaptic derivate: "live update". And I am now perfectly happy with a little wheel on my task bar which becomes orange when new updates are ready.

      Besides that, installation of operating system may be interesting and funny at the beginning. But, after years of professional usage of different kinds of OSs, reinstallations became a very frustrating task for me. When I switched from SuSE to Debian in in the middle of 2004, I felt like I loosed a big rock from my neck: I didn't need to think about new major versions, I had always the latest stable software -- I didn't have to compile new Apache (with PHP and the rest of important modules) whenever some major feature was released...

      I think that ordinary users are not *so* happy with reinstallations of the system and big upgrades (like switching from one version of Windows to another is), too. Software should be useful, not a goal per se.

      So, yes, I think that in the future, software distributions will be based on upgrades: for free or for fee.

      If similar is possible for, let's say, cars -- I am sure that the most of car owners would prefer silent fixes and upgrades than buying new cars and fixing and upgrading it manually.

      Of course, there would be always people who prefer to do everything alone. But, I don't think that it is a majority. Or, at least, someone may prefer to play with car hardware, but not with computer (or even car) software or refrigerator.

      In other words, if installing software is not your job or your passion, it is much better to spend your time in reading a book, playing WoW, having sex or whatever else, than in trying to do something which other people are doing much better for you, than you are able to do.

    18. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by ilovegeorgebush · · Score: 2, Informative

      What the hell are you talking about? Using Sid is fine whether you're a Debian developer or not. I've used it for years on various machines and it's never bitten me. I do development in various languages and platforms, as well as need to compile C, C++ applications.

      Your comment is typically elitest, and damnright wrong.

    19. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by petermgreen · · Score: 3, Informative

      Using stable in your sources.list is generally a bad idea. Moving from release to release should be a concious dessision done with a copy of the release notes in hand. Going in with a blind dist-upgrade often causes problems which may be tricky to recover from.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    20. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by daemonburrito · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Good advice.

      Etch is maintained to 2009-09. dist-upgrading a production server on release day, just for the fun of it, is probably a terrible idea. I'll be sticking with etch well into next year.

    21. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by Eunuchswear · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you are using "stable" in your sources.list verses the actually release name you'll in all likelihood just upgrade right along to the new release, and probably without much fuss.

      Never do this in any kind of production environment! You'd be crazy to do any release->release update without testing your own apps first.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    22. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by potHead42 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Your comment is typically elitest, and damnright wrong.

      eh? he's just speaking the truth, Sid certainly has some serious bugs now and then. I also got bitten by a GRUB bug which made my system unbootable, and with bigger transitions there's always some dependency breakage. but you just have to get accustomed to this things, and be careful when doing big upgrades. I still run Sid on my home machine and my personal server, but I would only recommend it if you already have experience with Debian.

    23. Re:Obligatory "does it matter?" by MadMidnightBomber · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Debian 'unstable' is still more stable than Windows. Don't mod this funny, I'm entirely serious.

      PS. You wimps who don't like living on the edge can always use 'testing'.

      --
      "It doesn't cost enough, and it makes too much sense."
  3. Lenny Brisco by Maestro485 · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's about time we had some Law and Order in that rogue Debian distro!

    1. Re:Lenny Brisco by Trogre · · Score: 2, Funny

      Not Lenny!

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    2. Re:Lenny Brisco by unPlugged-2.0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh my god they killed Lenny. You Bastards!!!

  4. What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    A new release already? That doesn't sound right.
    This isn't the Debian I grew up with.
    Something's fishy.

    1. Re:What? by WK2 · · Score: 5, Funny

      This is just a release announcement. As usual, they give you the month, but not the year.

      --
      Write your own Choose Your Own Adventure. http://www.freegameengines.org/gamebook-engine/
  5. Will they keep the bug count artificially low? by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I've noticed that Debian, Mozilla, and Gentoo all have a nasty habit of saying, "that's not a bug!", and then when finally convinced:

    "Well. We can't look at it for THIS release." And then your perfectly valid bug is shuffled off into a nice category where it won't upset their bug count for the release effort.

    Note that the total number of bugs in Lenny is actually around 1800- only by a pretty fine comb have they been able to claim "only" 360 bugs.

    1. Re:Will they keep the bug count artificially low? by setagllib · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There's a big difference between a release-critical bug (one that would basically ruin a whole release for everyone) and an annoyance (such as spewing diagnostic messages under certain circumstances on certain hardware).

      Ubuntu has stuck to its schedules by releasing with plenty of release-critical bugs still in the air, and fixing most of them in post-release updates. That's cool for getting a release out there, but it basically makes every official release feel like an RC1.

      --
      Sam ty sig.
    2. Re:Will they keep the bug count artificially low? by SuperBanana · · Score: 3, Interesting

      an annoyance (such as spewing diagnostic messages under certain circumstances on certain hardware).

      A system which spews diagnostic messages will fill up /var, and is far more than an "annoyance". If Debian Stable had such a bug, it would be inexcusable. People rely on it to run critical production systems.

      How often do we complain about vendors shipping buggy software? And look at the graph for bugs for stable- in the last few months, it's skyrocketed!

      Ubuntu has stuck to its schedules by releasing with plenty of release-critical bugs still in the air, and fixing most of them in post-release updates.

      Yeah, I still shudder from the utter mess of Gutsy upgrades from Feisty. Not a single Ubuntu user in the office had a clean upgrade...

  6. Re:Freeze just now? by bh_doc · · Score: 3, Informative
  7. Re:Freeze just now? by jd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just looked through the Debian package list. Looks like there's a lot I'd have expected that isn't there (ATLAS seems to be missing, as are the MUMPS and Fortran 95 programming languages - gfortran's f90 support is considered an old dialect, buggy and inadequate by a number of Fortran sites, and I didn't see Erlang on the list either). There are also a lot of ancient versions. For example, HDF5 1.6.6 has not been supported for some time. HDF 1.6.7 is the supported current version in the 1.6.x branch and has been since February, but the website makes it clear that the 1.8.x branch is intended as the official current release.

    This is something that isn't Debian't fault -- there are way too many packages with way too many updates and far too few people helping -- and is something that all distributins suffer from. The specialist distros may help, but I don't like the concept. Beter to have a single core distro with extensions for specialist needs, as then you can combine extensions according to problem-space rather than dealing with the version hell that always happens when you mix distros.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  8. Why the name "Lenny"? by kyjl · · Score: 2, Funny

    Trump Ubuntu in their weird names, call it Lemmy instead.

    You might at least get a good look at Debian from people other than us just on the name alone.

    --
    Perl, n. A language spoken by Eskimos.
    1. Re:Why the name "Lenny"? by arrenlex · · Score: 5, Informative
  9. Re:Freeze just now? by jd · · Score: 2, Informative

    Being confused is healthy. G95 (g95.sourceforge.net) is NOT gfortran, which is a Fortran 90 implementation, not a Fortran 95 implementation. gfortran is also listed by organizations such as NASA as not to be used due to severe bugs, with instructions to use g95 instead. Hey, I can only go by what they say. I can't access the other pages you linked to - I suspect they're now slashdotted. However, HDF5 1.8.1 is extremely stable and is the version people are supposed to be using. No idea what version of ATLAS Debian is using, but the latest stable (and yes, it is stable) version is 3.8.2. If Debian is using anything later than 3.6, I'd be surprised. MUMPS is used in specialist areas. By not including it, it obviously won't impact anyone who does use Debian since, if they needed MUMPS, Debian isn't something they'd use. It's self-fulfilling and therefore quite useless as a measure of interest. The question should be one of "if MUMPS was included, what changes would there be in the size and nature of the userbase, if any"? That is entirely different, as it does not fall into the recursive dependency trap.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  10. Re:Ubuntu isn't based on Testing by ichthyoboy · · Score: 2, Informative

    Because Ubuntu is snapshot of unstable, isn't a LTS version somekind "snapshot" from the "Stable"?

    Nope...it just means that they will support it longer (security updates for 3 years for desktop, 5 years for server) than the regular releases (18 months for server and desktop). Hence the Long Term Support moniker.

  11. Re:Ubuntu isn't based on Testing by petermgreen · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ubuntu is built off a snapshot of Unstable,
    Not exactly, changes are auto-imported from debian unstable only for packages that don't have any ubuntu specific changes.

    so I don't see how Debian's freeze will affect it.
    Debian tries to keep testing and unstable pretty close to each other. Changes in unstable that are not wanted in testing can be a major PITA when bugs need to be fixed (there is another way into testing but they prefer not to use it because the packages get far less testing when they are introduced by that route).

    So while unstable is not technically frozen developers are strongly discouraged from uploading stuff to unstable that are not intended to become part of lenny

    --
    note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  12. September? by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 2, Funny

    Great! Did they say what year?

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  13. Corrections... by Maulkin · · Score: 2, Informative

    1) It's Luk, not Luke
    2) He's a Release Manager, not the Debian project's maintainer. Whatever that is.