Slashdot Mirror


Debian GNU/Linux 5.0 "Lenny" Released

Alexander "Tolimar" Reichle-Schmehl writes "The Debian Project is pleased to announce the official release of Debian GNU/Linux version 5.0 (codenamed Lenny) after 22 months of constant development. With 12 supported computer architectures, more than 23,000 packages built from over 12,000 source packages and 63 languages for the new graphical installer, this release sets new records, once again. Software available in 5.0 includes Linux 2.6.26, KDE 3.5.10, Gnome 2.22.2, X.Org 7.3, OpenOffice.org 2.4.1, GIMP 2.4.7, Iceweasel 3.0.6, Apache 2.2.9, Xen 3.2.1 and GCC 4.3.2. Other notable features are X autoconfiguring itself, full read-write support for NTFS, Java programs in the main repository and a single Blu-Ray disc installation media. You can get the ISOs via bittorrent. The Debian Project also wishes to announce that this release is dedicated to Thiemo Seufer, a Debian Developer who died on December 26th, 2008 in a tragic car accident. As a valuable member of the Debian Project, he will be sorely missed."

90 of 386 comments (clear)

  1. Best KDE 3.5 distro? by nicc777 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Still KDE 3.5 - so perhaps this will be the KDE user's distro of choice?

    --
    Need an ISP in South Africa?
    1. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by sqldr · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm using 4.2 here, you insensitive clod!

      --
      I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
    2. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by a09bdb811a · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yes, the timing has worked out perfectly.

      I run Debian testing, so I've been on 3.5 for a long time, and very happily I might add.

      Now when sid starts moving again, KDE 4.2 will go in - completely avoiding the earlier, less complete releases that everybody was ranting about.

      Couldn't have worked out better, and is a reminder that you don't always need to be on the bleeding edge anyway.

      Debian has a very good KDE packaging team, btw.

    3. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by pabs3 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The Debian KDE team would love any help people can give, perhaps from Kubuntu guys!

    4. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by ultrabot · · Score: 4, Informative

      Now when sid starts moving again, KDE 4.2 will go in - completely avoiding the earlier, less complete releases that everybody was ranting about.

      Hopefully they will freeze KDE 4.3 with Qt 4.5. Freezing kde at 4.2 would seem like a mistake, when you consider that KDE people mostly focus on fixing bugs for 4.3. Also, Qt 4.5 should bring big performance improvements.

      --
      Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    5. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by scientus · · Score: 2, Informative

      a freeze is quite a ways away, we just had a hard freeze and now is long merge time.

    6. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by turgid · · Score: 5, Funny

      Slackware users use a gui?

      Only to multiplex xterm, and xeyes to point to the mouse.

    7. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hi. I'm the infamous Anonymous Coward, and it's time we had a talk.

      For years now, I've been enhancing the discussion on Slashdot through interesting interjections and humorous anecdotes (often about homosexual African Americans), but I feel things just aren't working out.

      It takes me an awful lot of time, researching composing and spell chekcing the many hundreds of valuable posts I make a day, and although I don't request anything in return all I ever see is abuse. You moderate my comments down for absolutely no good reason.

      I've had enough.

      From this point on I'm just not going to bother. It's over.

      I've been feeling this way for a while, slowly I've put less and less effort in my posts, repeating the same ideas over and over and, now, even started repeating whole posts verbatim.

      It's been fun, Slashdot, but I'm disillusioned. You broke my heart, and I am never doing to give you the benefit of my insight again.

      Be happy.
      Love and regrets,
      Anon.

    8. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The Debian KDE team would love any help people can give, perhaps from Kubuntu guys!

      I hope not. I'm have used kubuntu since 0606 and been happy about it and recommended it to everybody. But I stayed on 0804 with still has kde 3.5, and now I'm looking for an alternative distro.

      It's not the KDE4. I think it at least will be great now with 4.2, but (almost) all the extras that kubuntu put in are gone. No GUI to adjust the clock, no GUI to set up your screens etc.

    9. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by Daengbo · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm using Lenny right now (though Gnome), and I see both 3.5 and 4 available in Synaptic.

      We shouldn't forget the Debian Live project which has live CDs for Gnome, KDE, XFCE, and LXDE.

    10. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by harry666t · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Huh? I've switched from Intrepid to Lenny on my laptop two months ago because Gnome 2.24 had broken session management (or rather: none at all), KDE 4.x had broken everything else, and KDE 3.x was ported... poorly. Debian is great for tracking the latest, newest, hottest NON-BROKEN versions of stuff. Sorry, I'm using my computer to do WORK, and a working computer is MUCH more valuable than a computer with a GUI with a higher version number in an "about" box.

      Each time I try out some other distro, I eventually come back to Debian. And Debian will always forgive me and welcome me like a good, old friend. Debian, I love you.

    11. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hey! I have a couple of VLC windows open for pron!

      On slackware? Fess up - you're piping your pr0n through aalib or libcaca as ASCII-art. Otherwise, you're not really hard-core.

    12. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by ZERO1ZERO · · Score: 2, Informative

      it's posted to nearly every story. I've certainly seen a it a few times now. I guess who ever modded it felt the same. It was funny the first time.

    13. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by QCompson · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Unlike everyone who is bitching and moaning, I read the notes about how KDE 4.0 was just a preview, do not use, do not install on production machines, etc ... so I continued to use KDE 3.5 until 4.2 came out.

      Oh you mean these http://www.kde.org/announcements/4.0/ release notes? Where it says nothing about 4.0 being a preview or not installing on production machines?

      Nice try, but it's not easy to rewrite history that soon. I'm sure the KDE devs appreciate your efforts though. IMO KDE4.2 still isn't ready for use on production machines anyway.

    14. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Informative

      It was right there in bold when I installed openSUSE.

      But more importantly, even your link says it's a test release, so they can get feedback ...:

      For those interested in getting packages to test and contribute, several distributions have notified us that they will have KDE 4.0 packages available at or soon after the release

      No rewrite of history necessary. Everyone knew this was alpha-quality software. The distros made it clear during the install process that this was just for getting a first look at KDE 4x. The only ones doing the whining are those who didn't bother to get a clue.

    15. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by EsbenMoseHansen · · Score: 2, Informative

      Strike the word "barely". It was just plain unusable. I blame KDE4 for that editing error.

      I agree that that press release did not convey what the developers and people reading the mailing lists understood: That KDE 4.0 was released to allow wider testing, but especially to allow kdelibs based applications to start porting to KDE 4.0. And really should only be installed alongside 3.5.

      Still, the past is past. KDE 4.2 is definitely for nearly everyone, though a few rough areas exists (e.g. 2-screen setup is not completely possible with GUI alone, though at least it acts decently instead of doing weird stuff). And the present-windows-task-switcher was worth the wait (ok, most people hate it, but it fits me like a glove :) )

      --
      Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.
    16. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by jetxee · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Try openSUSE (and use this link to get all the media codecs with one click). Try Fedora. Try Mandriva Heck, try Slackware.

      A linux without apt-get? No way! Not once again!

    17. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by Randle_Revar · · Score: 2, Informative

      KDE releases every six months, so Squeeze should get 4.3 at very least, and 4.4 is likely. 4.5 is even a slight possibility, I would guess.

    18. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by adavies42 · · Score: 4, Funny

      real slackware users multiplex shells with gnu screen

      --
      Media that can be recorded and distributed can be recorded and distributed.
      -kfg
    19. Re:Best KDE 3.5 distro? by identity0 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think this shows the problem with Slashdiots who try to push Linux.

      What is PR?

      Public. Relations.

      So apparently, we're supposed to ignore the message the group puts out to the public regarding its own product, and instead read Slashdot/Planet KDE/digg for news morsels instead. Because that's what a REAL nerd does, and by golly, if you don't know the difference between a .0 and a stable release, you have no business trying to use our beloved software!

      And this isn't even a case of an obscure technical issue being glossed over, they took a well understood norm (X.0 means it's a final release, after release candidates and alphas/betas), gave it their own definition, and declined to explain it in their press releases - you know, the thing that's supposed to explain to the uninitiated what the product is? But yeah, that's just PR, REAL nerds don't do PR, right? Public relations? What's that?

      This is why Linux is still behind Apple and even MS.

      Go back to Slackware. Please.

  2. A Debian release! by jamesmcm · · Score: 5, Funny

    Savor this moment guys, a Debian release is like a Solar eclipse, you are lucky if you get to see one in your lifetime!

    1. Re:A Debian release! by wahgnube · · Score: 5, Informative

      Huh?

      While it's easy to pile on with the melodrama, the last stable release, Etch, was in the middle of '07. A year and a half is an entirely reasonable amount of time to wait for an operating system release.

      I, for one, congratulate them on and thank them for their timely release!

    2. Re:A Debian release! by timmarhy · · Score: 3, Informative

      care to mention how long it took for them to get to etch?

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    3. Re:A Debian release! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative
    4. Re:A Debian release! by petermgreen · · Score: 5, Informative

      note: theese lengths only take account of the month not the time in the month so they may be a little off but they are good enough for the purpose

      buzz->rex 6 months
      rex->bo 6 months
      bo->hamm 13 months
      hamm->slink 8 months
      slink->potato 17 months
      potato->woody 23 months
      woody->sarge 35 months
      sarge->etch 22 months
      etch->lenny 22 months

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    5. Re:A Debian release! by novakyu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Etch just looked longer because *a lot* of improvements to the GNU/Linux was being made during that time in terms of the kernel hardware support and the desktop stuff, and whoever was using Debian stable during that time couldn't take advantage of those developments.

      They always had the option to go "testing", which is surprisingly stable, compared to other GNU/Linux distros or, God forbid, Windows. The only downside is that the security patches usually come first to the stable release.

    6. Re:A Debian release! by Kjella · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sarge really was the source of these endless jokes. Almost three years, on a Linux that was considerably less mature than it is today was forever. Remember that all releases are tested and mature by the time they are included in stable, so they were at the worst more like four years behind the bleeding edge. Obviously you don't want a server anywhere near the bleeding edge, but damn do I understand all the application developers that said "You're running THAT?! We stopped development on that branch years ago, nobody backports anything not even security fixes anymore". A distro has to be a team effort with the people developing it - you can't expect Debian people to fix 20000 old packages alone. The current situation is just fine for a server OS, though I wouldn't run my desktop on it. I used to run testing until early 2007 but for all the faults Ubuntu has, having semi-annual "packs" is better than the constantly changing flow that testing is.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    7. Re:A Debian release! by risk+one · · Score: 5, Funny

      A year and a half is an entirely reasonable amount of time to wait for an operating system release.

      I run Vista, you insensitive clod!

    8. Re:A Debian release! by wall0159 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Don't worry - I hear that the stable release of Vista is coming Real Soon Now ;-)

    9. Re:A Debian release! by petermgreen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There are three reasons why 3 years for debian was far worse than 5 years for windows.

      The first is that linux was pretty immature at that time. IIRC woody didn't even have X autoconfiguration and asked you scary questions about your monitor rather than just defaulting to safe settings and letting you crank it up later.

      The second is software authors have different attitudes towards windows and linux.

      Windows developers tend to assume you will be running a stable release of windows that was current sometime in the last decade or so.

      Linux developers (at least desktop ones) tend to assume you will be running something within a year or two of the bleeding edge.

      Running current apps on an older version of windows (down to 2K at least) is generally not a problem. Running current apps on a linux distro of similar vintage is a PITA.

      The third is that while XP lasted a long time MS did update it quite a lot over it's lifetime (far more than just security fixes and bugfixes)

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    10. Re:A Debian release! by jonadab · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > > One would think so. After all, proprietary operating systems
      > > sometimes go twice that long between service packs.
      > But they aren't tied to the software they run so tightly.

      Debian isn't that way because of anything Debian does wrong. It's that way because when application developers put out a new version of anything for Linux, they typically make it *require* the absolute latest version of every library it uses, which effectively means it won't run on an operating system that's more than a couple of months old.

      It isn't just that there aren't ready-to-install packages. You can't install the latest Firefox on Debian etch even if you're willing to go to the trouble to compile it yourself, because it requires a newer version of GTK than the one in Debian. Bear in mind, GTK is the main widget set, the thing used to draw windows and scrollbars and checkboxes and so on in the graphical operating environment (Gnome). That's NOT something you're ever going to upgrade independently of the operating system (and even if you wanted to, you generally can't because the new version of GTK probably requires the absolute latest versions of twelve other things, and so on; when you get to the end of the chain, you probably find out that libc or something requires a more recent kernel than your system is based on). New versions of applications *SHOULD* support three-year-old versions of GTK. But they almost never do.

      And if it's not GTK it's libc or glibc or some other basic part of the platform API. Again, new versions of applications *SHOULD* support three-year-old versions of these libraries, but the almost never do. I don't happen to know which library is (or which libraries are) the holdup for Subversion, but if it were possible to just compile it for etch, somebody would have done so, and the package would be available -- probably not from the official Debian etch repositories, but from backports or somewhere. If it's not available at all for Debian stable, it's almost certainly because it won't compile, because it requires a hyper-recent version of some library or another. And that's NOT the platform or distribution's fault. That's the application developer's fault.

      Now, when the curmudgeonly sysadmin insists on running oldstable for months and months after the new stable release comes out, that's arguably a different matter. In that case, you don't necessarily expect new versions of application software to work. Although, on other platforms (e.g., Windows, or Mac OS X for that matter), you still would.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    11. Re:A Debian release! by jonadab · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > Sarge really was the source of these endless jokes.

      Actually, long before sarge development began, or woody for that matter, there were already jokes about Debian releases being aeons and aeons apart and severely out of date. These jokes are probably almost as old as Debian itself. What happened with sarge is that the jokes went from lighthearted and fun to cruelly ruthless black comedy.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  3. Screenshots + DPL interview by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Some first impressions on the release, screenshots and an explanation of the delay from Steve McIntyre, the Debian Project Leader, here: http://tuxradar.com/content/lenny-has-landed

    1. Re:Screenshots + DPL interview by zsau · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Screenshots of Debian? I can't think of anything more useless. You might as well try taking photos of life-forms there's such a huge range. No-one but me has a computer that looks+works the way mine does. (Albeit I've changed the feel more than the look, so any non-Gnome Crux screenshot will be reasonably close.)

      --
      Look out!
  4. Thiemo by emj · · Score: 5, Interesting

    He was a great hacker, it's nice to know that more people will remember him.

    1. Re:Thiemo by bap · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes, it is a shame he died in a tragic car accident, instead of one of those non-tragic fatal accidents.

    2. Re:Thiemo by ColonelPanic · · Score: 3, Informative

      The word "tragic" has an actual meaning, you know. If the accident were the ineluctable consequence of a character flaw -- and I do not suggest that this be the case -- then the usage would be correct and informative.

      --
      "Skill shows through where genius wears thin." -Wittgenstein || Religion: uniting aviation and architecture.
    3. Re:Thiemo by JackieBrown · · Score: 2, Funny

      They have called me stupid, ugly, sad, etc

      I can't stand those annoying adjectives.

  5. Re:remember by tenco · · Score: 4, Informative

    Don't do this. Squeeze won't be supported by the testing security team in the beginning: http://lists.debian.org/debian-testing-security-announce/2008/12/msg00019.html

  6. Blu-Ray? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe I'm just overlooking the obvious, but where IS the Blu-Ray ISO image? I can see it mentioned in the SHA1SUMS file, for instance, but it doesn't appear to be on the cdimages server, neither as an ISO nor as a .torrent.

    1. Re:Blu-Ray? by sinan_imam · · Score: 4, Informative

      It is not going to be in the archives because it would waste a huge amount of space. You may build it yourself using jigdo.

    2. Re:Blu-Ray? by pabs3 · · Score: 3, Informative

      IIRC you need to use jigdo to assemble them from the packages. This page hints at that:

      http://www.debian.org/releases/lenny/debian-installer/

    3. Re:Blu-Ray? by pabs3 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It was also mentioned on the dev announce list:

      http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2009/01/msg00002.html

    4. Re:Blu-Ray? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't forget the 'best' install out there: NetInstall. Unless you actually want to download 31 CDs or 5 DVDs worth of stuff. The best part about Debian is the mix and match of installing what I want. I honestly can't fathom trying to download 20Gigs of stuff just to make a desktop unless I plan on installing in middle of nowhere.

    5. Re:Blu-Ray? by harry666t · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's how things look like on YOUR side. Now put yourself in the role of a maintainer of a mirror. Bandwidth costs money, and mirroring a Linux distro usually is something you do voluntarily.

    6. Re:Blu-Ray? by Daengbo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I like just having the 10 MB disk and downloading only what I need (12Mb/s no cap). Installs take an hours or two, but I never have an unpatched system.

    7. Re:Blu-Ray? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It is not going to be in the archives because it would waste a huge amount of space. You may build it yourself using jigdo.

      So what you're saying is that they are doing their best to prevent it?

      (Maybe the thing has changed substantially, but last time I tried to use jigdo I actually ended up using a different Linux in protest.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:Blu-Ray? by gbarules2999 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, the Blu-Ray image is practically every Debian package on all the servers out there; what's the point in hosting them twice? And I can attest to some very successful Jigdo downloads and installations. I have a whole bunch of Debian 4.0 discs laying around that I used Jigdo to install, and had zero issues.

    9. Re:Blu-Ray? by petermgreen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      it is indeed unfortunate that afaict there is STILL no decent client for jigdo.

      The main jigdo gui plain doesn't work. There is a script called jigdo-lite that "works" but provides no progress indication and fills your console with garbage and gives no clear indication of whether it is resuming or starting again from scratch.

      anyone here familiar with the source for a linux download manager and fancy adding jigdo support?

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  7. Re:KDE 4.2 practically already available by nutshell42 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Honestly, if you're the kind of guy who uses Debian stable you certainly will stay with KDE 3.5 until at least 4.5.

    Good to see that in the time of bleeding edge releases-every-6-months distros there's still a choice that actually allows you to get work done.

    --
    Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
  8. Newsworthy. Actuall news. by Qbertino · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Just reading this (Note I am not a Debian User anymore) has me noticing just how much the quality is in the FOSS field compared to MicroSuck, Adobemedia and any other company that's just in it for the money and not the technical perfection. Despite all marketing gibberish to the contrary.

    While I've been using Ubuntu for it's ease of use in recent years and see Debian more as a kind of building kit when I need a more customized Linux setup, it is none-the-less a terrific feat to wrap up a product that meets Debians quality standards, as opposed to those of - let's say - Windows Vista.

    Even the slashdot post on the new Debian has more content that a MS press release.

    That all observed and said, congrats to the Debian crew for yet another release of a great OS and Software kit.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:Newsworthy. Actuall news. by MrNaz · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yea, that Debian patch Tuesday is *such* a pain in the ass.

      --
      I hate printers.
    2. Re:Newsworthy. Actuall news. by MrNaz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There are very few things that the GIMP can't do that Adobe PS. Granted, PS is a more polished product, but non-professionals are unlikely ever to notice a difference in feature set. Furthermore, the GIMP interface has been improving, and I now think that they are equally good, only very different which is why it is relatively difficult to switch from one to the other when you are very familiar with one. Such a scenario favors the incumbent. Hello, Windows vs Linux.

      --
      I hate printers.
    3. Re:Newsworthy. Actuall news. by heffrey · · Score: 4, Funny

      You can't beat the fantastic quality of Debian, especially when it comes to the fantastic work done with Valgrind and Purify to remove some of the bugs in the OpenSSL seeding code used to generate encryption keys. Obviously no closed source code could possibly live up to those marvellous standards. It's just not possible to write high quality closed source code. In fact the mere act of releasing previously closed source code under the GPL makes it high quality.

    4. Re:Newsworthy. Actuall news. by heffrey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The bug was introduced September 2006 and fixed in May 2008. I think there were many very troubling issues relating to this bug that everyone who is works on and relies on OSS should be concerned about. The main point, in my view, is the lack of process. This is a bug that was introduced by the downstream packagers of OpenSSL. So, the distro supplies something that you think is OpenSSL, but in reality it isn't. It's the downstream packagers' version of OpenSSL. I'm afraid any trust evaporates at that point.

    5. Re:Newsworthy. Actuall news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Oh ffs, the OpenSSL developers were just as responsible for the snafu as Debian was. More so I'd say since the Debian developer asked on the openssl-dev list about his patch and whether anyone had any objections to it. Here's the response he got from a OpenSSL developer:http://marc.info/?l=openssl-dev&m=114652287210110&w=2/

      List: openssl-dev
      Subject: Re: Random number generator, uninitialised data and valgrind.
      From: Ulf_Möller
      Date: 2006-05-01 22:34:12
      Message-ID: 44568CE4.9020906 () openssl ! org
      [Download message RAW]

      Kurt Roeckx schrieb:
      > What I currently see as best option is to actually comment out
      > those 2 lines of code. But I have no idea what effect this
      > really has on the RNG. The only effect I see is that the pool
      > might receive less entropy. But on the other hand, I'm not even
      > sure how much entropy some unitialised data has.
      >
      Not much. If it helps with debugging, I'm in favor of removing them.
      (However the last time I checked, valgrind reported thousands of bogus
      error messages. Has that situation gotten better?)

      Got that? He was given the ok by a OpenSSL developer. They're every bit as responsible as Debian.

    6. Re:Newsworthy. Actuall news. by jonadab · · Score: 2

      > GIMP doesn't even compare to Photoshop.

      You know, that's funny, almost every time I hear of Photoshop, it's because somebody's comparing Gimp to it.

      I have a friend who works in the publishing industry. (Among other things, he typesets ancient languages, such as Akkadian. He also creates a lot of book covers.) He's used Photoshop regularly for years. He told me a couple of years ago that he had heard about Gimp and tried it out, and was impressed with a really useful feature it had, that Photoshop lacked at the time. Then a month or so later a new version of Photoshop came out, and it had it, in spades. On the whole, he likes Photoshop better. But to me his comment suggests that the two are, indeed, comparable.

      Personally, I like Gimp on account of how I'm used to it. Although 2.6 has been annoying me, in that I'm having difficulty getting used to the way they've rearranged the menus (particularly, making Colors a toplevel item). Objectively, I have to admit that the new arrangement is ultimately better, but darnit, I'm not *used* to it yet, and I keep reaching for Layer->Colors and it's NOT THERE, and that bugs me. Old habits are hard to break, and all that.

      It's hard for me to compare Photoshop to Gimp, because I haven't seen a recent version of Photoshop. The last time I did see it, it was running on MacOS 8. And the interface was pretty terrible, e.g., it wouldn't always let you save in the image format you wanted, and did not tell you why. EVENTUALLY I figured out that it wanted me to flatten the image (i.e., merge visible layers) first. What? WHY? Gimp has NEVER required that. There were other major usability guffs too. But that was years ago, so the new version's presumably better. I mean, back then Gimp didn't show the menubar on image windows, so you had to use context menus for everything, and *that's* since been fixed.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    7. Re:Newsworthy. Actuall news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Debian developer asked on the openssl-dev list about his patch. He even pointed out the potential problem with his patch, but was unsure about its entire ramification. He was seeking guidance about it from the openssl developers and was told to go ahead it if it helps with debugging. If the openssl developer, who is the most knowledgeable about the code he works on, had bothered for more than a second to think about the potential problem with the patch, and had communicated his concerns to the Debian developer, the whole thing could have been avoided. Openssl developers screwed up by not giving proper guidance, period. They are just as culpable.

    8. Re:Newsworthy. Actuall news. by grumbel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Openssl developers screwed up by not giving proper guidance, period.

      It is not the job of the OpenSSL developers to babysit Debian people that don't know what the fuck they are doing. And its especially not Debian jobs to fiddle in code that they don't have a clue about. If the Debian people think their patch is useful, they should have submitted it upstream for proper review and wait till it got applied to the upstream branch, not casually asking on the mailing list and then just moving ahead with applying a debugging hack to a production software.

      All that aside however, the very simple fact that this patch never got a proper review from other Debian people nicely illustrates that security in Debian is something that mostly works by blind luck, not by well thought out procedure.

    9. Re:Newsworthy. Actuall news. by swillden · · Score: 3, Informative

      Got that? He was given the ok by a OpenSSL developer. They're every bit as responsible as Debian.

      Not quite. The openssl developer was right that the change didn't cause a significant problem when applied to the lines the Debian dev asked about. The Debian dev then applied the change both there and to another bit of code, and it was that second -- unreviewed -- change that did the damage.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  9. Re:KDE 4.2 practically already available by ultrabot · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Honestly, if you're the kind of guy who uses Debian stable you certainly will stay with KDE 3.5 until at least 4.5.

    Good to see that in the time of bleeding edge releases-every-6-months distros there's still a choice that actually allows you to get work done.

    Ubuntu LTS is one such choice as well.

    I made the mistake of upgrading to Ubuntu 8.10 from 8.04 LTS (and didn't like it), and now I need to go back. With Lenny out, it will feel less like a defeat if I install Lenny instead ;-).

    --
    Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
  10. Coming Soon! by stonedcat · · Score: 4, Funny

    Duke Nukem Forever

    --
    You can't take the sky from me.
  11. Oblig. by dangitman · · Score: 2, Funny

    Not Lenny!

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
  12. No OpenOffice 3.x by Lord+Satri · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm obviously very happy about the Lenny release since my employer (part of Environment Canada) makes us use Debian. However, I guess there are "good" technical reasons, but I'm sad OpenOffice 3.x could not make it. One of our tech allowed us to install OO3 on our Etch machines. The result: 003 makes my Etch crash (the full OS, not just the app, to my entire surprise!). I'm not saying it's the same for everybody else, but it's a sad thing for me. (in fact, even 2.4.1 can crash Etch since I installed 3.0... and I'm no way knowledgeful enough to fix that problem :-/)

    Why does computers have to be that complicated? ;-)

  13. release with 84 RC bugs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I might be missing something here, but aren't there still 84 release-critical bugs open on lenny? I understand a number of them have been deferred to lenny.1, but I had expected this number to drop further before a release was made. Has Debian changed their release policy?

    [captcha: prudence]

    1. Re:release with 84 RC bugs? by ultrabot · · Score: 4, Funny

      I understand a number of them have been deferred to lenny.1, but I had expected this number to drop further before a release was made. Has Debian changed their release policy?

      Yes, they actually made a release.

      *drumroll*

      --
      Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    2. Re:release with 84 RC bugs? by tenco · · Score: 5, Informative
  14. unstable is pretty stable too, really by Trepidity · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Unstable is unstable in the sense of changes happening semi-frequently, which you may not want on your production servers. But if your primary problem with Debian stable is that it doesn't get new software often enough, then presumably changes happening semi-frequently is precisely what you do want. And it gets bugfixes and security fixes first.

    Despite the name, it's not where totally crazy experimental stuff that is more-likely-broken-than-not happens. There's a separate area, aptly named "experimental", for those packages. For example, the xf86->xorg change was staged in experimental for several months before being pushed to unstable after getting put into pretty good shape. OpenOffice 3 is undergoing a similar process currently, and will presumably be in good shape by the time it gets into unstable.

    There is admittedly sometimes breakage in unstable, usually of specific packages, just because it's the newest widely used distribution: something'll never get to testing if it breaks in unstable. You can avoid even that, unless you really are the first person ever to encounter a particular bug, by using apt-listbugs to warn you of packages with major bugs filed against them, and delay upgrading those.

    1. Re:unstable is pretty stable too, really by EsbenMoseHansen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Experimental is also where KDE 4 has been living all this time. It'll be good to have experimental back to be something I rarely get a package from, rather than half my GUI systems :)

      --
      Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.
    2. Re:unstable is pretty stable too, really by XanC · · Score: 2, Informative

      Or am I just talking out my arse again?

      Yes. Arrange every software producer by the quality of their releases, and Debian is very likely at or near the top.

      "Unstable" is not a release. Don't you think that somebody who specifically installs something called "unstable" is expecting to do a bit of testing? These are people for whom the latest & greatest is worth it.

      If you install Debian Stable, it is rock solid. The testing has been done. All the features and polish have already been added; only security updates will be made.

  15. FHS 2.3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The debian press release on http://www.debian.org/News/2009/20090214 mentions:

    It also features compatibility with the FHS v2.3

    (The press release for 4.0 did the same.)

    However:
    http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#LIB64 tells me that

    The 64-bit architectures PPC64, s390x, sparc64 and AMD64 must place 64-bit libraries in /lib64, and 32-bit (or 31-bit on s390) libraries in /lib.

    What insensitive clod does break a lot of older software and claims to be compliant with standards when they aren't?

  16. OT question ... by jopet · · Score: 2, Insightful

    will there ever be a way to watch blue-ray movies legally on a Linux computer?
    I have been using Linux on my desktop for years now, but I am getting increasingly frustrated with the lack of drivers for all the things that get more and more "normal" in the Windows world: synchronizing mobile phones, loading maps into a GPS device, playing Blue-ray disks, operating TV-cards, security devices (e.g. chip-card readers) and other special hardware.
    So it is not only a lack of game playing software or professional graphics software like Photoshop ... it is simlply a major *effort* for the average user to ignore or work around all these problems.
    And it seems for some of these problems there are major legal or other obstacles which I cannot see getting solved in the future.
    Opinions?

    1. Re:OT question ... by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's no legal way to do many worthwhile things in this world. Don't worry about it. You're here to live your life, not obey laws.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:OT question ... by jopet · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Buy stuff with Linux support and quit your bitching.

      I think I was not bitching but asking a question. The problem is that I would love to buy (yes buy) stuff with Linux support - problem is, that it often simply does not even exist.
      My original question was exactly about one of the things I would consider to be of major importance: the ability to play blue-ray movies on the desktop. As far as I can see there is no legal way whatsoever to do this on Linux and there is no legal way in sight either.
      I can assure you that I do check for Linux support, but the harsh reality is that, especially in Europe, where the selection of goods is probably a lot smaller than in the US, it is very often simply impossible to get anything decent that also works with Linux. Apart from blue-ray movie playing -- there simply is no decent GPS device that allows me to transfer map data to the device on Linux.
      I guess my point is that these are serious problems for making Linux more common for a broader user-base and I would love to see constructive ideas how to deal with them instead of ignoring the problem, routinely putting the blame on hardware companies and disregarding anyone who raises the issue as a troll.

    3. Re:OT question ... by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think I was not bitching but asking a question. The problem is that I would love to buy (yes buy) stuff with Linux support - problem is, that it often simply does not even exist.

      Please name a product you have been searching for, where you cannot find something which suits your needs which has Linux support.

      My original question was exactly about one of the things I would consider to be of major importance: the ability to play blue-ray movies on the desktop. As far as I can see there is no legal way whatsoever to do this on Linux and there is no legal way in sight either.

      My point was that this is a result of the legal manouverings of the people behind Blu-Ray. If you buy Blu-Ray then you are voting with your dollars for standards which make interoperability difficult or even impossible. You have no one but yourself to blame.

      At some point you have to decide if you have principles or not. Clearly, you do not believe in the ability to play purchased media on Open Source platforms if you actually spend money on Blu-Ray discs. There's no third way, and I wish people would stop pretending there is.

      I guess my point is that these are serious problems for making Linux more common for a broader user-base and I would love to see constructive ideas how to deal with them instead of ignoring the problem, routinely putting the blame on hardware companies and disregarding anyone who raises the issue as a troll.

      Obviously you don't understand that the world is capitalistic, and/or don't understand how capitalism works.

      The only vote that you have that matters is how you spend your dollars. Whether that's what products you choose to buy (or not) or whether you elect to pay your taxes (or not) or activities you choose to engage in (or not) due to their tax situation... it's all based on money. The entire world (yes, China too) works on the principle that what makes you more money is good. Therefore if you choose to spend money on closed standards, the world will provide you with more closed standards, because obviously there is money in them. If you choose to spend money on a shitty movie or a crappy album just because it's a member of your chosen genre or put out by someone whose other work you like, you are voting for them to make more shit. Do you see how this works? By the same token, if you buy a Blu-Ray disc when it is difficult to play on Linux, you are voting for making it difficult to play media on Linux. And at some point you have to take personal responsibility. You have to make the decision to only support media which is delivered on your terms.

      Different people have chosen to achieve this goal in different ways. For some, they make the decision to engage in civil disobedience by using a program whose use is actually proscribed by law in their jurisdiction to play the media that they've paid for. I am unaware of anyone actually ever being arrested for playing a DVD or Blu-Ray disc that they actually purchased on an unlicensed device, and do not believe that laws should be followed simply because they exist. I am skeptical that you actually follow every law in effect where you live, and in any case if you have not memorized the code you can't be sure, so I am not clear as to the precise nature of your objection.

      Anyway, by the same token, following the DMCA is equivalent to voting for it. Don't obey unless you aim to be a slave. Yes, it is risky to disobey. Yes, you have an obligation to disobey an unjust law. Let me just go ahead and terminate this thread by invoking Godwin here by saying that "just following orders" is not and never has been a valid excuse for supporting tyranny.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:OT question ... by Helmholtz · · Score: 3, Informative

      There's nothing "grey" about the DVD solution. Using libdvdcss in the USA is a violation of the DMCA, and consequently is illegal at a federal level.

      --
      RFC2119
    5. Re:OT question ... by daveewart · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There's nothing "grey" about the DVD solution. Using libdvdcss in the USA is a violation of the DMCA, and consequently is illegal at a federal level.

      So why not release Debian with all the nice goodies included, but have the final stage of the installer ask "Are you in the US?" ... and if you answer "Yes", then it removes anything that cannot be distributed there.

      --
      "If you think the problem is bad now, just wait until we've solved it." --- Arthur Kasspe
    6. Re:OT question ... by elyk · · Score: 2, Informative

      Try the Magellan eXplorist series (well, I can only personally speak for the 210) - the MapSend software to export map files runs almost flawlessly under wine (the only problem I've encountered was a crash when trying to enable 3D view in the software - not critical for loading maps). Once they're generated, the GPS unit has a USB Mass Storage mode allowing you to load the new maps as easily as you would copy them onto a flashdrive.

      --
      MS-DOS: Most Severe Denial of Service
      Free Online Backup
  17. Hardware donations by wikinerd · · Score: 4, Informative
  18. Spontaneous upgrade for me... by wvmarle · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Today I just decided to do an upgrade of my Debian server, to have the latest security and bugfixes. Instead I suddenly got hundreds of packages to update... well this explains why. I jsut have my sources pointing at stable, so that is updated now automatically.

    A complete new stable release, interesting.

    Not sure whether I should be happy with this or not. On one hand great to have a major update of some software, on the other hand I hope I'm not going to break anything.

    And the only thing I was actually planning to do was install ldap and authentication over ldap!

    1. Re:Spontaneous upgrade for me... by RichiH · · Score: 2, Informative

      Point your sources to oldstable if you want to keep etch :)
      Or point them to etch, which will work as well.

    2. Re:Spontaneous upgrade for me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Point your sources at etch if you want to keep etch.

    3. Re:Spontaneous upgrade for me... by mcubed · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Generally speaking, it's a good idea to use the nicknames in your /etc/apt/sources.list, rather than the generic names. So use "lenny," "squeeze," "sid," rather than "stable," "testing," "unstable." That way you won't be surprised by a release.

      Though, really, Debian releases are so few and far between, it's a pretty infrequent "surprise."

      Check the release notes in advance of upgrading to be aware of potential issues. If you just change your current list from "stable" to "etch," you won't have any of the new stable flowing into your system. Etch will be supported with security updates for another year.

      --
      "No live organism can continue for long to exist sanely under conditions of absolute reality;..."
  19. You don't have to download everything by VampireByte · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ever heard of doing apt-get after a minimal install? This isn't windoze where you have to take everything or nothing.

    --

    Run and catch, run and catch, the lamb is caught in the blackberry patch.

  20. Meanwhile in Redmond.... by DrYak · · Score: 2, Interesting

    To put things into scale :

    WinME->WinXP home 13 months (but at least it got home users rid of WinME)
    Win2k->WinXP pro 20 months
    WinXP->Vista 61 months (yup) (+2 if you count when it hit the shelfs)
    Vista->Win7 announced for 2010, so that would put it at least 37 months
    (that it before, delay get inevitably announced)

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  21. I should add my favorite part of unstable by Trepidity · · Score: 2, Informative

    You get world-class support for bugfixes, reasonable enhancement requests, package-interaction issues, and so on, often with new versions available within days of filing a good bug report. You get some of that in stable, but with a less satisfying lag until the next point release (or with more minor issues until the next major release).

    That was really what blew me away when I switched in 2002 from running Windows 2000 full-time to running Debian sid/unstable full time. Complex issues like some program depending on a system behavior that had since changed weren't passed off as someone else's problem, or left for being fixed in the next version. Someone responded, often within hours, asking for details where necessary, we went back and forth by email a few times, they consulted with other maintainers if it was a multi-package issue, and a few days later the problem was fixed. In my day job, I don't get that level of support even for $600 software packages, even after an hour on the phone with inexperienced flunkies.

  22. Re:I didn't notice ... by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ``I wonder what the fetishism is with Debian stable ...''

    It's one of the few releases for which a real effort is made to get all show-stopping bugs out one way or another. That's an enormous feat for a distribution that includes not only a complete operating system, but also more application software than any distribution I've compared it to.

    Sadly, both etch and lenny have been released with known release critical bugs. These bugs have not affected me, but I am still concerned that Debian is inching away from "release only when ready" towards "release with bugs if necessary to make the release date". I don't want that to happen; there are enough distributions that do this already!

    --
    Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  23. Re:KDE 4.2 practically already available by ultrabot · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Debian testing is far more stable than Ubuntu and is regularly updated.

    Debian testing and Ubuntu are both based on Debian unstable. It takes a while for testing to become "debian stable", and it also takes a while before Ubuntu becomes a "release". Moreover, it takes a while for an Ubuntu LTS release to get better - but if you give Ubuntu LTS some time to mature, it will prove to be extremely solid (this is what happened with Hardy), while still delivering relatively recent packages.

    --
    Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
  24. Where's python 2.6? by mstamat · · Score: 2, Interesting

    While I'm happy to see that libapache2-mod-python at last supports python2.5, I'm very dissapointed that debian developers didn't include python2.6. Do we have to wait another 22 months for it?

    If the debian folks think that python2.6 could cause problems they are free not to make it the *default* python. But not including it at all is insulting for the python development team. Most important, since python2.6 is considered a stepping stone to python3, it is also very inconvenient for those who want to start migrating their code to python3.

  25. Re:MicroSuck??!! Grow the fuck up child by Qbertino · · Score: 2, Interesting

    MicroSuck??!! Grow the fuck up child

    Wow. Chill. You're getting a little worked up about that.

    A little anecdote: I got a Laptop as a christmas present from my Company last xmas. I came with Windows XP preinstalled and an optional Windows Fister on a disk. I thought I might as well give it XP try, even though I've used Windows back in 2002 the last time for serious work.
    After 2.5 hrs. configuring it and installing all the tools I'd like to try out (Netbeans/JavaFX, Firefox, Flash CS3 & Flex SDK, etc.) and some other stuff it wouldn't shut down. ... Ok, things do go haywire sometimes, no bad feelings. Forced shutdown, did powercycle, continued exploring WinXP. Looked fairly neat, even for someone used to a pimped out KDE 3.5 or Max OS X with Exposé. Then I noticed my HDD going krrr,krrr,krrr. Every second. Thought I allready had a virus, troyan or something. Then I thought - wait, this is Windows - it could be MS crap pounding my HDD. Asked my flatmate - no Programmer but a MS expert user and he basically said: Yeah, that's XP indexing stuff. Be happy you didn't install Vista, he'd been doing that constantly. Then he told me that XP doesn't shut down regularly if something in userspace tries networking or simular stuff and that a shutdown-hang can take up to 20 minutes. Then he told me what actually happens if MicroSHIT WGA thinks your licences isn't valid. 4 weeks nag popup, then a minimal mode in which you only can start Internot Exploder and ony visit the MS homepage with in order to buy a licence.

    At this point I once again had enough of Windows and took the Ubuntu 8.10 CD I had prepared for such cases beforehand and installed it. Zero fuss. Nada. EVERYTHING on my brand new Dell Volstro 1510 worked right from the beginning. Wireless, Bluetooth, all the extra sensor buttons for the music player, bells, wistles and blingbling. Rythymbox I think the musicplayer is called, yes? I don't even know or care exactly, that's how flawlessly it integrates with the controlls. And I actually like Amorok and it's magnatune integration more! And Ubuntu actually doesn't hang on shutdown if I chose to turn of my WiFi inmidst of a session.
    On it goes: This weekend I bought a super-brand-new Saitek Cyborg X 5-axis joystick full of buttons and stuff that looks like it came out of a starwars movie or something. Pluged it in, fired up VegaStrike and started using it. I didn't even have to install frigging drivers! ... Allthough VS does crash a little to often for my taste, but that's a different story ...

    So, for the bottom line, pardon me, but I, a senior IT expert with 23 years of programming experience and - bets are ten to one - way more experience with various OSes than you - actually do think - after thourough personal experience at various occasions - that the recent OSes MS has been putting out are about the shittiest of core software-products I personally have come across lately. It isn't that MS does Desktop OSes on the side, you know? The term MicroSuck I therefore actually do consider quite fitting and appropriate. And no I am not an OS X nor a Linux fanboy. I just know a shitty software product and a bad company policy when I see one, that's all.

    Glad we have settled that.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca