Slashdot Mirror


openSUSE 11.2 Released

An anonymous reader tips news that openSUSE 11.2 has reached its official release. You can get it from their download page, or just grab the torrents (32-bit, 64-bit). "openSUSE 11.2 will come with the latest version 2.6.31 of the Linux kernel, the beating heart of every openSUSE system. The default file system of openSUSE will be switched to the new Ext4 as well. Of course, openSUSE will continue to support Ext3 and other filesystems — but on install, new partitions will automatically be designated Ext4. ... Desktops and servers can use the same kernel, but it's better to tune the kernel for the job at hand. That's why openSUSE now includes a desktop kernel specially tuned for desktop users. ... In addition to the work of the openSUSE Project in the desktop, openSUSE 11.2 includes the latest versions of the two desktop environments, KDE 4.3 and GNOME 2.28. KDE users will enjoy the new Firefox KDE integration, OpenOffice.org KDE4 integration, consistent KDE artwork and all standard applications being ported to KDE4 including KNetworkManager, Amarok, Digikam, k3b, Konversation and more."

151 of 207 comments (clear)

  1. The beating heart... by CannonballHead · · Score: 3, Funny

    openSUSE 11.2 will come with the latest version 2.6.31 of the Linux kernel, the beating heart of every openSUSE system.

    As opposed to all those other distros, which don't use the Linux kernel as their "beating heart." :)

    1. Re:The beating heart... by ZERO1ZERO · · Score: 3, Insightful

      at least its a differentiation of Linux and Distro. As in Ubuntu is not Linux. Really? Try telling (most) Ubuntu users. When somebody on the internet claims 'their Linux i not working' I'd say the odds are good that they are running Ubuntu.

    2. Re:The beating heart... by Bralkein · · Score: 3, Funny

      Depends if they set CONFIG_NO_HZ=y :P

    3. Re:The beating heart... by Mr.+DOS · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah; the others have the tick(er)less kernel.

            --- Mr. DOS

    4. Re:The beating heart... by Bralkein · · Score: 4, Funny

      Here on Slashdot today, not only did two people make a joke about an obscure techincal configuration option of the Linux kernel, we both made the same joke, and we made it one minute apart. This place is terrifying.

    5. Re:The beating heart... by CannonballHead · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Even geeks on slashdot refer to it as "Linux" and distros are named "RedHat Linux" and "Ubuntu Linux" and "SuSE Linux."

      If you called your car a "Mercedes Car" you might be under the impression that the entire thing was called a "car" and that "Mercedes" made a "version" of it. You probably wouldn't think that the "car" was actually just the engine and all the rest was called a "distribution." :)

      And frankly, I'm fine with calling it as a whole "Linux" just like people refer to Windows as a whole as "Windows," even if it's Windows XP or Windows 2003 or Windows Vista or Windows 3.1. Most people differentiate, but not all the time.... "Windows" is the least common denominator. "Linux" is the least common denominator. :)

    6. Re:The beating heart... by caluml · · Score: 1

      When somebody on the internet claims 'their Linux i not working' I'd say the odds are good that they are running Ubuntu.

      Rewind 10 years, and s/Ubuntu/Redhat/g

    7. Re:The beating heart... by houghi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Even geeks on slashdot refer to it as [...] "SuSE Linux."

      Then they must hand over their card as soon as possible. It is openSUSE or SUSE Linux Enterprise for some time now. The latter is the 'official' Novell one and is also called SUSE. openSUSE is community based where Novell is a very important part of the community.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    8. Re:The beating heart... by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      OpenSUSEbsd?

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    9. Re:The beating heart... by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Most distros don't need to move gallons of blood...

      Come to think of it, what the heck is SUSE doing!?

    10. Re:The beating heart... by CannonballHead · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I know it's openSUSE or SLES... it's actually "SUSE Linux Enterprise Server" if you want to be picky. I've used openSUSE personally and SLES at work.

      (I actually had the capitalization wrong though, I thought the U wasn't capitalized. Oh well. Learn something new...)

      But most people don't get caught up in saying exactly the right name, I don't think. Nobody calls it GNU/Linux ;) (hehe)

      Seems that most people call it by the distro name first, though, since most distros market it as such, I guess...

    11. Re:The beating heart... by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      Well, if they ever *gasp* upgrade their kernel, I guess they'll be doing a heart transplant...

      I knew upgrades were scary things sometimes, but...

    12. Re:The beating heart... by JSG · · Score: 1

      Your caustic comment seems to imply that all distos run Linux which is a bit demeaning to *BSD or indeed any OS that is "distributed". 8)

      "latest" - pah -I have 2.6.32-rc6 on my laptop courtesy of Gentoo.

    13. Re:The beating heart... by JSG · · Score: 1

      I think you are right - the u is und. However, few people know what SuSE actually stands for, those that do probably speak German.

      I suspect the marketeers in Novell prefer "SUSE" and have capitalized the u.

      Software und System Entwicklung

    14. Re:The beating heart... by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      That's what I originally figured but openSUSE and SLES titles both have it capitalized on their websites...

      I think it looks better uncapitalized. Oh well. They didn't ask me. ;)

    15. Re:The beating heart... by Eil · · Score: 1

      1999 called, they want their argument back. (Only back then it was Red Hat.)

    16. Re:The beating heart... by quickOnTheUptake · · Score: 1

      Almost says wikipedia:
      1992 -- S.u.S.E. founded
      1998 -- shortened to SuSE
      2001 -- released SUSE Linux Enterprise Server
      2003 -- changed the company name to SUSE (officially, no longer an acronym)
      (later in) 2003 -- acquisition announced

      --
      Mod points: Guaranteed to remove your sense of humor.
      Side effects may include gullibility and temporary retardation
    17. Re:The beating heart... by dhammabum · · Score: 1

      The other distros are the undead...

      --
      I am not a robot. I am a unicorn.
    18. Re:The beating heart... by wild_oscar · · Score: 1

      Probably because when somebody is using Linux, odds are good they're running Ubuntu (according to distro watch, for example). Ubuntu is as good as any other distro, and Canonical is making a remarkable work making the adoption of Linux work. Please, don't ruin that with elitist comments.

    19. Re:The beating heart... by zoward · · Score: 1

      Here on Slashdot today, not only did two people make a joke about an obscure techincal configuration option of the Linux kernel, we both made the same joke, and we made it one minute apart. This place is terrifying.

      And six people who understood the joke about a tickless kernel have already modded it Funny. This place is awesome!

      --
      "Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?"
  2. Finally by kimvette · · Score: 3, Informative

    Finally, easy upgrades come to OpenSUSE.

    sudo zypper dup !

    I just had to cleanly install OpenSUSE 11.1 the other day because I was in the middle of patching 10.3 when Novell took down the repositories. I worked on the broken system for a week before making the time to reformat/reinstall. I started patching it by hand to make the 10.3 -> 11.1 dup work, but it was just too time consuming.

    But anyway, I'll be running zypper dup in the next few days after demand on the servers dies down. It's about time SUSE users get a clean in-place upgrade process. :-)

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    1. Re:Finally by houghi · · Score: 1

      I also welcome it. Many people have already used it and seened to be happy with it. I will wait till 11.3 till I use it. Although by then I hope to be just using my own distri that I will be making on http://susestudio.com/

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    2. Re:Finally by Macka · · Score: 1

      Zypper *groan* .. what the hell was wrong with yum? It pisses me off that if I am ever called on to work on a SuSE system that I can't use the knowledge and experience I have with yum and have to learn yet another fucking package manager. If they had a problem with Yum, why not just work closer with Redhat to improve it and keep the development effort/cost down for everyone. They obviously haven't learned from Unix history: that trying to be a "better" unix than everyone else by being different doesn't win you more market share, it just makes you a niche player. Commercial unix vendors fell into this trap years ago and look where it got them !

    3. Re:Finally by metamatic · · Score: 1

      Zypper *groan* .. what the hell was wrong with yum?

      Well, for starters it's incredibly slow. I have quad-core 3GHz servers with RAID arrays that take longer to update using Yum than my 1GHz VIA C3 EPIA box does using APT.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    4. Re:Finally by Macka · · Score: 1

      And you've tried zypper and it's faster? And what does quad-core have to do with anything? yum isn't multi-threaded. I have a bunch of HP Proliants at work with 2.13GHz CPUs, also with RAID and yum whizzes along quite nicely from a local repo server over NFS.

    5. Re:Finally by Macka · · Score: 1

      I should clarify that NFS statement. Was thinking about when I do a yum localupdate ... of cause you don't need NFS to install/update from a local repo.

    6. Re:Finally by metamatic · · Score: 1

      Yes, zypper is significantly faster.

      I mentioned quad-core and RAID to reassure readers that it couldn't be a CPU or disk speed constraint causing yum's slowness.

      I don't think I've ever seen yum do something I would describe as whizzing. I've seen it take a crap a few times, but that's probably due to RPM.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    7. Re:Finally by Macka · · Score: 1

      That's not justification enough for pissing off your users who have to work with multiple linux distributions. An update is something you do very infrequently, and yum not that slow that shaving a few minutes off an update is going to make a snot of difference. The important thing is whether or not it works, resolves dependencies properly and preserves changes you've made to local config files. And yum does the job very well.

      Zypper to me is a "political" move, not a technical one, and it's not going to win them any friends in industry.

      I've seen it take a crap a few times, but that's probably due to RPM

      Um, but SuSE are still using RPM underneath zypper, so how is that a better situation exactly?

    8. Re:Finally by houghi · · Score: 1

      Well, then keep on using yum. It is still there.
      An old blog about the time differences: http://duncan.mac-vicar.com/blog/archives/309

      The reason they started with zypper was the problem of speed. In the beginning it was slow. Now it is seriously fast. And yet you can still use yum if you want that. It is there. The choice is yours.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    9. Re:Finally by Tarlus · · Score: 1

      And what does quad-core have to do with anything?

      Probably nothing, though the 2 GHz difference is pretty substantial.

      --
      /* No Comment */
    10. Re:Finally by metamatic · · Score: 1

      Yum was also a political move. They could have gone with urpmi, Smart, or APT4RPM, all of which were proven parts of other RPM-based distros at the time they decided to switch to yum.

      (In fact, ideally they'd have switched to APT4RPM, and then in a later release dropped RPM in favor of dpkg, and ended up with something that actually works reliably. Unfortunately, that's never going to happen because RPM was written into LSB, RedHat would never go along with any change, and SuSE needs to stay close to RedHat for commercial reasons.)

      In a way, I agree with you that Yum's snail-like speed is not that big of a deal. I've had so much pain from SuSE's supporting-and-then-not-supporting of APT, Smart and Yum, plus the pain of YaST brokenness and the injection of Mono, that I'm in the process of decommissioning SuSE servers in favor of RHEL everywhere I need commercial Linux, even though that means using Yum. But you asked what was wrong with Yum, so I answered the question.

      [Opinions mine, not IBM's.]

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    11. Re:Finally by Klivian · · Score: 1

      The "finally" is a bit strong, since it has been there for a while.

      Using zypper dup worked flawlessly upgrading my 11.0 installs to 11.1. So I'll say you are at least one release to late with that one.

  3. Re:But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    No (it's a Linux distro)

  4. Why switch to openSuse? by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is nice and all but that's a pretty standard distro release, can anybody tell me why i would want to switch from a similar distro, say ubuntu 9.10 or fedora 12 to openSuse?

    sure I could try them all but there is only so much time i want to spend installing/setting stuff up.

    --
    IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    1. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't! It is made by Novell so this is actually a M$ Linux and thus evil!!11one

    2. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by russlar · · Score: 1

      yast

      --
      Anybody want my mod points?
    3. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by houghi · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Only you can tell. If you are happy with what you have, stay where you are. (This also goes for Windows users.) If you are interested in trying out, download it and try it out. I use it as I like YaST and zypper. I also like to use it to combine it with the repositories I can make myself on https://build.opensuse.org/ and I like it because I can easily make my own distro based on it on http://susestudio.com/

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    4. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by Krondor · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sure a few reasons;

      OpenSUSE has one of the best KDE4 setups. They've done a lot of work into making KDE4 really shine. The Firefox KDE integration is AWESOME, and not something I am sure the other distros are shipping with. There is also additional work above and beyond stock on OpenOffice and such. A great attention to detail on the theming (not that you can't change that on Ubuntu and Fedora).

      Zypper is hands down the best RPM tool and I would say on par or superior to Apt. Definitely a step over yum.

      Nomad provide an RDP server for Linux that supports Compiz, not sure if that's been ported to other distros.

      iFolder (if you care about that) is so far only packaged for SUSE, I believe.

      Also Yast is great to administer your system if you're not command line friendly. It used to be atrocious, but now is very much decent. I still don't use it that much, but it has an appeal to people (especially our Windows friends). Overall it's a solid distro and I would say on par with Ubuntu and others.

    5. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by H.G.Blob · · Score: 1

      IMHO openSuse is the by far the most polished KDE distro out there and yast is a very useful tool if you don't like editing config files.

    6. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's a bit more stable that Fedora, or at least that's been my opinion from using it. It's well balanced new enough packages but it doesn't change every 6 months and when it does change it's possible and fairly easy to upgrade.

      It has java packages, mono packages, all the dev tools you can image. The repository collection they have is fairly rich and complete as well. Flash runs in Firefox, there are VLC package with video codecs and all the good stuff. Honestly, to me as a user and I've sort of done my time being a bleeding heart libre/free software advocate and monk, it's not ideological, it's simply a platform and it works pretty darn well. I know people get butt hurt about mono and java and who Novell has done business with but it works out of the box, has damn never everything I need and it has all the fluff that is nice to have. If you've got some ideological feelings, you'll be happier with FC12. Firefox is called "Firefox" in OpenSuse. I believe it has a webkit based browser now as well. Opera is in the non-OSS repo. It has a non-OSS repo.

      As far as comparing it to Ubuntu? It's RPM based. It seems like a very competitive product with Ubuntu but I couldn't say which is "better."

      It's a high quality, community driven distribution with all the bells and whistles.

    7. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      The reason I run openSUSE is that they have great packages. Ubuntu's 9.10 release was like every other release they have, which is broken. Fedora also likes to push bleeding edge.

      openSUSE does live fairly close to the bleeding edge, but they have a lot of developers pushing upstream code, and making solid packages. Heck, I often run weekly development snapshots from them and feel pretty secure in knowing they won't break my box.

      They have arguably the best KDE 4.x desktop out there (Arch and Sabayon also being solid contenders). They also put a lot of time and attention into their Gnome desktop, but I don't run it and can't comment on it.

      Yast is a fantastic tool.

      Novell seems to be pushing the bulk of development in major projects like Evolution, Openoffice, etc. Novell and Red Hat seem to be the two kings of upstream development.

      The knock against openSUSE is that they're falling a little behind in certain features (they're just now pushing EXT4, I think they still haven't moved to Upstart or DeviceKit, etc.) Sadly, I think think this is a result of the Novell layoffs last year. I wish there were fewer distros, so that the Linux community could consolidate and focus on putting out the best possible product as oppose to replicating everyone else's efforts.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    8. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      One of the best aspects of Yast is that the core design and libraries are agnostic of the toolkit. So the CLI version of Yast looks and operates the same was as the GTK+ and Qt versions.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    9. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by sricetx · · Score: 2, Informative

      And it's problematic if you do like editing config files. At least when I was using it (Suse 10.0 or 10.1?) before I switched to Kubuntu, Yast didn't play well with config files I had hand-edited and tended to overwrite my changes. Package management was god-awful in the Suse 10 release too, but I'm assuming that's been fixed by now.

    10. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by TheGreatOrangePeel · · Score: 1

      When I'm curious about a distro, I test ride it on VirtualBox as it minimizes the amount of time I waste on the distro. That's not to say that all Linux distros are a waste of time ... My advice is that you install a few apps and go through a couple of updates in the virtual machine before you spend any time on doing an install on a real machine.

    11. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by Krondor · · Score: 1

      Package management was god-awful in the Suse 10 release too, but I'm assuming that's been fixed by now.

      It has been fixed, thank god! OpenSUSE 10 made the horrible mistake of trying to wedge in the redcarpet (ZENworks for Linux) stuff. It went horribly horribly bad. They lost a lot of people as dependency hell ensued. 10.1 was a complete rewrite of how they handled packages, and with zypper standard now (even with Yast). It's not just fixed but it is the best RPM distro at handling packages, IMO.

      Eww 10.0... shudder.

    12. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by cbhacking · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, one of the major advantages of Yast is that it has an excellent NCurses-based terminal interface, which works beautifully over ssh. Easiest distro to remotely manage that I've ever tried (also, back in the day, easiest one to fix on the occasion that a graphics driver update made X stop working).

      For those who don't know, Yast is basically the configuration tool for *everything* - repository and package management, network configuration, video driver configuration, user accounts, runlevel and login behavior, configuring a hypervisor, re-partitioning, managing GRUB... basically, it's a centralized management tool. It's graphical and designed for user-friendliness, with help info for every setting, but it will also display the relevant config files and allow you to edit them manually too. I've actually found it useful when trying to learn the format of a given config file, since Yast's help info + comparing the options on the graphical display with the generated config file = an easy way to learn the format and options of a config file.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    13. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by anandrajan · · Score: 1

      This is nice and all but that's a pretty standard distro release, can anybody tell me why i would want to switch from a similar distro, say ubuntu 9.10 or fedora 12 to openSuse?

      I've been running opensuse since 9.3 (when it was just SUSE 9.3). I don't know about switching from fedora, but opensuse 11.2 has a very nice kde 4.3 implementation. And you can run kde 4.3 without using pulseaudio which is a plus in my book since I don't see the need for pulse on my standard desktop. Of course YMMV.

      --
      Anand Rangarajan anand@cise.ufl.edu
    14. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by kimvette · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you want to get actual work done, OpenSUSE is pretty much ready to go out of the box. Its achilles' heel has historically been poor wifi support (requiring a lot of tinkering, whereas Ubuntu has worked consistently well with wifi in my experience) but hopefully 11.2 fares a lot better in that regard.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    15. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 1

      I forgot about pissing of the boycott Novell types, I'm downloading the torrent NOW!

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    16. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      I can't think of any "compelling reasons" to switch distros. Suse is nice, it gave me my "entry" into Linux because it worked on hardware that everything else balked at. But - I've actually moved away from Suse to Deb derivatives - mostly Ubuntu.

      As for testing everything - I've encouraged many Windows users to download and run LiveCD's. That advice might apply to seasoned *nix users as well. Curious, but not willing to go to all the work of installing? Test drive those LiveCD's!!!

      Oh yeah - I made a convert last evening. He brought me an e-Machine with Vista. Totally Fubar'd. I sat him down, demonstrated E-live and Ubuntu, and he demanded that I install Ubuntu for him. I'll be getting some support calls from him, but I won't be cleaning any virus off of Ubuntu!

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    17. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by houghi · · Score: 1

      For those who don't know, Yast is basically the configuration tool for *everything*

      It is also used for the installation itself. If you make your own openSUSE or SUSE based distribution, you can completely change the whole installation process.
      http://forgeftp.novell.com//yast/doc/SL11.1/ has a TON of information and if you desire you can even write your own modules.

      e.g. the part about automated partitioning under AutoYaST.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    18. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by slonik · · Score: 2, Informative

      For those who don't know, Yast is basically the configuration tool for *everything* - repository and package management, network configuration, video driver configuration, user accounts, runlevel and login behavior, configuring a hypervisor, re-partitioning, managing GRUB... basically, it's a centralized management tool.

      Your forgot to mention that Yast also manages Apache, Samba, security, sshd, printers/scanners, fax, network time ntp, etc. Pretty much Yast configures everything that is configurable:-)

    19. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by houghi · · Score: 1

      Well, if youi are a developer, you could think about putting your stuff on https://build.opensuse.org/ where you can build not only for openSUSE and SUSE, but also for CentOS, Fedora, Mandriva, RedHat, Debian and Ubuntu.

      Because what I often see is packages build for one distribution, but often not for many.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    20. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by cheros · · Score: 1

      I've slowly started to wonder that as well. WiFi support has always been, well, rubbish, the KDE4 mess wasn't really their fault but didn't help either, and you need to add other repositories if you want to download stuff like Asterisk - which usually isn't properly integrated so you end up hunting for libraries and the whole DIY show starts that you were trying to avoid in the first place. And that's before you try to run it 64bit. I used to actually buy the commercial version, but with OpenSuSE not working for me that stopped.

      On the flipside, when it works it works well and is quite easy to change into what you want (I tend to run a desktop which is halfway between desktop and server). I found Ubuntu in that respect more work - it really is a desktop where server facilities are still "old school" config files.

      As I tend to run *one* version of Linux I'll torrent the OpenSuSE DVD once more and see if it works for me on a clean box (I never found upgrades work that well, and it's nice to clean out the crud). I also just grabbed the Mandriva DVD which is a distro I have never used before. We'll see which one wins, I'm not religious about it :-)

      --
      Insert .sig here. Send no money now. Owner may sue, contents will settle. Batteries not included.
    21. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Then again, if you can't use the command line, you may as well just use Linux as a personal Desktop OS. I'll never care about Yast or any other admin tool like it on the servers that I support.

      Oh my God! People might want to use a desktop OS and not run servers! RUN FOR THE HILLS! THE ELITIST JERKS ARE COMING!

    22. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by gbarules2999 · · Score: 2, Funny

      You forgot to rant about Mono.

    23. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by richlv · · Score: 1

      exactly. some time ago they evaluated whether they should keep this approach. it seems they decided on keeping, which is great.

      when gui breaks, or when using cli only (servers), console yast is awesome to have even if you are a slackware user (like me), who is used to configuring everything with config files.

      if anybody from suse reads this, keep console/gui uniformity of yast, that is definitely a selling point (as opposed to gui-only redhat tools...)

      i'm also using opensuse for people whom i'm setting up linux - having fairly good kde integration is a big reason for that.
      a pretty big problem is lack of what ubuntu calls 'lts', releases with longer support and repo availability.
      this has made me curious about rolling release distro like arch...

      --
      Rich
    24. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by richlv · · Score: 1

      agreed, yast tends to nuke many user changes. on the other hand, many of those files have notices at the top warning against editing them and pointing to source files that are used when regenerating those files ;)

      as for package management, pushing for zen tools on opensuse was a HUGE mistake. at that point the top faq was "wtf ?", and answer was "remove all traces of zmd". which i tried to do whenever i installed suse, but if i forgot, it sometimes messed things up irrepairably.

      in latest releases zypper has gotten much better, it has improved performance and i have actually started using it instead of smart package manager. what i still feel is missing in zypper - decent, supported and properly working interactive mode.

      --
      Rich
    25. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      are you kidding? your Ubuntu is only at 9.10, while OpenSuSE goes all the way past 11!

    26. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by cbhacking · · Score: 1

      Poor WiFi? Hmm... I have a laptop that has run openSuse since 10.0, and over the last couple of releases the WiFi works even while installing (and no, it's not a liveCD, just a graphical installer program). I was able to download updates and such before the OS was actually installed.

      Intel Pro Wireless 802.11abg, I forget the exact chipset designation.

      --
      There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
    27. Re:Why switch to openSuse? by backwardMechanic · · Score: 1

      Clearly if you're running Ubuntu you should switch, because it's only at version 9, but the best choice is obviously Fedora, because then you get v12. Easy, eh?

  5. Wokring Link? by SirBigSpur · · Score: 1

    Anybody know of a mirror that actually works?

    1. Re:Wokring Link? by Vetruvet · · Score: 1

      No... it seems just about all mirrors (that I checked) are either timing out or give 403 Forbidden messages. I was able to start a download from a direct link (but it got flaky and stopped), and now I can't even start (or find a working torrent).

    2. Re:Wokring Link? by houghi · · Score: 2, Informative

      http://software.opensuse.org/112/en which will point you to a mirror automatically, to bittorernt, metalink or a mirror you can select.

      If you have a bit of experience, you can go with the Network version. Otherwise go with the GNOME or KDE version. Only if you will be installing on several machines should you download the DVD.

      After installation there is no difference between the different versions, except for the obvious difference between KDE/GNOME. The CD versions are live versions can be run from USB stick as well.

      More infor on the above URL

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  6. Re:Who...cares? by mcrbids · · Score: 1, Troll

    Really? (typing this on my Fedora Core laptop)

    It's been my desktop for nearly 10 years...

    --
    I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
  7. Re:Who...cares? by Disgruntled+Goats · · Score: 1

    WorksForMe(TM)

  8. Re:I use windows 7 by SirBigSpur · · Score: 1

    I use Windows 7 as well and so far really like it. However I find that its fun and interesting to play with different Operating systems from time to time.

  9. Re:Who...cares? by filesiteguy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It is unfortunate, however, you'll need to run Wine or VMWare or Virtualbox or Xen to get those viruses loaded and running.

    (I tend to think the other way: How can I run Nautilus, KTorrent, KRDC, and GMountISO in Windows.)

  10. Only 11.2? by filesiteguy · · Score: 1

    I'm suprised to see they're only at 11.2. I honestly had moved away from SUSE/openSUSE towards Ubuntu after the zypper wars and teh KDE3/4 issues. (I succumbed to using GNOME on Ubuntu and am okay with it.) The last I used openSUSE was 11.1 almost a year ago, and I would have figured they to be at 11.3 or even 12.0 by now.

    1. Re:Only 11.2? by houghi · · Score: 1

      Every 8 months there is a new version (used to be 6). So 11.3 will be out in 8 months. I can't wait. :-D

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    2. Re:Only 11.2? by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      They moved to an 8 month release. 8 months is almost a year. Are you suggesting that Ubuntu is superior because the increase the version number every 6 months as opposed to 8 months?

      What does a version number mean?

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    3. Re:Only 11.2? by Vlad_the_Inhaler · · Score: 1

      A downloaded a brand new opensuse level around 20-December last year and am pretty sure it was 11.1. That is a l-o-n-g 8 months. I am grabbing it now and will put it up on my test machine when BitTorrent finishes.

      --
      Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
    4. Re:Only 11.2? by filesiteguy · · Score: 1

      Hey, Houghi! I see it used to be six months.

      I do have openSUSE 11.x running KDE 2.2 still...

      http://www.perfectreign.com/stuff/2009/20090522_kde22_opensuse11.jpg

    5. Re:Only 11.2? by filesiteguy · · Score: 1

      Nope! Wasn't suggesting Ubuntu is superior because of that. In fact, I miss the all-in-one functionality of YaST. Keep in mind, that I used SUSE/openSUSE from '05 until early '09. I only switched because of other issues I was having and the percieved instability of Novell to maintain both KDE and GNOME versions while trying to make zypper finally work (which it hadn't since replacing YPM in 10.x).

      Oddly enough, though I bashed GNOME heavily - and still find it's file open/save dialog lacking - I jumped into GNOME over KDE since I didn't really like what the KDE team had done with 4.x and felt GNOME was more suitable for day-to-day usage.

      Ubuntu is a very nice distro that *appears* to have better support than openSUSE and seems to have less fanatical devotees. :P

  11. Re:Be still my beating heart by TheModelEskimo · · Score: 1

    But words like Korny and Konfusing also come to mind,

    *booop beeep* INSERT COIN

  12. Re:But... by Vetruvet · · Score: 1

    I dunno, my wifi has worked perfectly since 10.3... on 2 different laptops and 1 dektop... all three had different chip makers (Atheros, Intel, Broadcom).

  13. Re:But... by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Suse read NTFS partitions out of the box years before Ubuntu could.

  14. Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Zombie+Ryushu · · Score: 1, Insightful

    When ext3 came out, I had reservations about it, and I stuck to ext2 until I was reasonably sure ext3 was totally safe. I've heard bad things about Ext4 corrupting data. While not as overtly malicious as Pulse Audio, (Which is an insidious parasite. Difficult to remove.) ext4 scares the Hell out of me at this state.

    I urge Linux users to stick to ext3 for the protection of your data. At least for another year, give ext4 the chance to mature, then, when we are certain ext4 is safe, start using it.

    1. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Rhapsody+Scarlet · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ext4 has been mature and stable for at least 3 years now.

      No, it's been in the kernel for three years but was developmental for most of that. It was only declared stable with 2.6.28, which was released just over one year ago. Personally, I'm going to wait another year or two here. When it comes to file systems, I tend to be on the conservative side.

    2. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Vlad_the_Inhaler · · Score: 1

      That statement loses all its impact when made by an AC.

      --
      Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
    3. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Enderandrew · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ext4 is merely an extension (that is mostly backwards-compatible) of Ext3. Ext4 was born out of patches that were intended for Ext3. In 2006, the decision was made to split some of the newer features being pushed into Ext3 under the namespace of Ext4. It isn't like they started development on Ext4 in 2006. In 2006, there was a usable file system from the day it was annouced as a "new" project.

      It was pretty damn stable then, and even more stable now.

      I've been running it for 3 years. The age of a product does not always equate directly to stability. There are old releases that aren't very stable, and then there are projects that are well designed, and are stable pretty much from day 1.

      Ext4 is one such project. However, if you're terrified of Ext4 eating your dog, you're welcome to run Fat32 if it makes you feel better.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    4. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 2, Interesting

      However, if you're terrified of Ext4 eating your dog, you're welcome to run Fat32 if it makes you feel better.

      Don't be obtuse. FAT is a horrible file system. He's going to stick with ext3.

      A simple Google search shows that many people and many different distros have experienced data corruption and data loss and it has been attributed to anything from bugs in ext4 to the kernel not behaving as the ext4 developers were expecting due to specific configurations made for a given distro. Some people are very paranoid about data loss. Using ext3 instead is his choice, and choice is what Linux is all about.

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    5. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Ext4 has been mature and stable for at least 3 years now.

      Then why did a bunch of people lose data in March of this year?

      That's fixed though. Just mount your filesystems with the option alloc_on_commit to get the safe Ext3 behavior.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    6. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Enderandrew · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually those "Ext4" data corruption issues that set the Internet all ablaze (including Slashdot) were mainly due to KDE 4 not handling metadata correctly. In the end, it wasn't an Ext4 issue. However, feel free to spread FUD.

      And you're right. I shouldn't have suggested he run Fat32 if he is paranoid that newer filesystems are inherently unsafe. He should run Fat16 to be sure.

      Certainly, an older file system that doesn't have the nicer, fine-grained journaling (and journaling controls) which be much safer.

      Ext4 is a wild, data-eating beast that just can't be trusted.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    7. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by clampolo · · Score: 1

      Stop giving advice out for things you haven't tested and stop spreading FUD. Yes. You.

      If you would take 30s to do some simple googling you would see that there are plenty of people having problems. You are an ass for accusing that guy of FUD without doing even a simple fact check. Yes. You.

    8. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Eil · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah, well I urge Linux users to stick to ext2 for the protection of your data. At least for another year, give ext3 the chance to mature, then, when we are certain ext3 is safe, start using it.

      >/sarcasm<

      I work in a datacenter with tens of thousands of Linux machines and we see Linux fail in every way imaginable. It's impossible to get any substantially-complex piece of code bug-free, the best anyone can do is "good enough." Sure, everyone has their own definition of "good enough," but I trust the judgement of the kernel and distribution developers in that regard. (Because if I didn't, I'd lobby for using a different OS entirely, anyway.)

      Besides, if nobody uses a particular feature out of fear, it can never be tested and proven reliable.

      Also, remember to keep backups whether or not you're using a filesystem that's seen recent development.

    9. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Eil · · Score: 1

      oh noes, my brackets went the wrong way

    10. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by sensei+moreh · · Score: 1

      And you're right. I shouldn't have suggested he run Fat32 if he is paranoid that newer filesystems are inherently unsafe. He should run Fat16 to be sure.

      Not sure about FAT16 - yeah, it's older than FAT32, but FAT12's been around longer. Just to be safe, though, I'd go back whatever the filesystem was that CP/M used.

      --
      Geology - it's not rocket science; it's rock science
    11. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by oatworm · · Score: 1

      I heard it keeps most of your data, but some of it spontaneously explodes from time to time.

    12. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Assembler · · Score: 1

      I remember reading something about this a while ago, but I forgot: what did KDE do wrong?

    13. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by rantingkitten · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah? Well, I recommend that everyone chisel their data into stone tablets and store them in underground, climate-controlled facilities. Give this "papyrus" thing a chance to mature and maybe I'll start using it, once I know it's safe.

      --
      mirrorshades radio -- darkwave, industrial, futurepop, ebm.
    14. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Abcd1234 · · Score: 2, Informative

      IIRC, they neglected to call fsync when writing out configuration data, and the POSIX spec states that unless you call fsync, there's no guarantees that the data actually hits the disk right away. Combine that with the fact that ext4 extended the delay between write() and physical write out to disk (which, I believe, they've changed, although I could be wrong about that), and a sudden crash can result in data loss/corruption due to blocks having never been written out.

      So, that said, it's absolutely true that KDE4 was making invalid assumptions about the behaviour of the underlying storage, which resulted in corruption. But it's also true that ext4's unusually long sync times exacerbated the problem. As such, I'd say there's plenty of blame to go around.

    15. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Kjella · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually those "Ext4" data corruption issues that set the Internet all ablaze (including Slashdot) were mainly due to KDE 4 not handling metadata correctly. In the end, it wasn't an Ext4 issue. However, feel free to spread FUD.

      Bullshit. The error was very generic and not limited to KDE, any system crash could lead to zero byte files in almost any application. It broke an extremely standard way of writing a new version of a file by writing it to a new file then renaming it in place of the old.

      You have a file foo.txt
      You write foo2.txt
      You rename foo2.txt to foo.txt

      Now your machine could crash for up to half an hour (I think, a long time), and you'd have neither the old or the new file. Unless you didn't explicitly fsync() the write, it could have renamed foo2.txt into place without having written the contents of f002.txt, and gone was all your data. It just became painfully obvious in KDE because it broke vital configuration files but it broke thousands of applications. It's a horrible case of the denial you see in Linux land, hiding behind the POSIX specification to defend all the real world damage.

      I have no faith in the people developing ext4 after that stupidity, and wouldn't use it on any of my machines. One thing would be if they handled it responsibly, but the childish approach they took was embarrassing. Any person that breaks convention wtih so little regard for the consequences, then tries to defend it so vigorously will not come near my systems. How knows how much else he's willing to break unless there's a standard that says he can't? Because there's sure as hell are many other Linuxisms that aren't POSIX in there as well, fortunately Linus has never been this kind of reckless idiot.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    16. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Enderandrew · · Score: 2, Informative

      You misunderstand.

      KDE 4 wasn't following POSIX standards for writing to a HDD. Most file systems have delayed writes and caching at some level.

      In an extreme sense, some were concerned that Ext4 could delay a write for up to a minute. It wasn't 30 minutes. The operation should still be in the journal. It should be recoverable.

      And before you get all upset, you should realize that these delayed writes also exist in Ext2 and Ext3.

      NTFS also supports OS-level write caching. Even worse, Windows Server will often enable it by default on top of a RAID controller having it's own level of write caching. So you can be told a file is written, when neither the OS actually sent the write to the RAID controller, and even if it did, the RAID controller hasn't actually performed the write yet.

      Ext3 and Ext4 both support varying levels of journals. You make the decision of which journal behavior you want. Do you want faster performance, or do you want more piece of mind?

      And since this discussion is in regards to openSUSE shipping with Ext4, openSUSE defaults to the safer ordered journaling mode.

      However, feel free to talk about your ass, spread FUD and live in the stone age.

      You're not any safer for it.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    17. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      Not to mention a part of the culprit is the fact that Ubuntu keeps shipping completely broken KDE packages. If they didn't ship broken packages, these crashes wouldn't have occured.

      You're example is at the userland level of 3 separate full on file operations. That isn't the problem. The problem was with one file operation on a low level, and what happens with the journal.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    18. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Rozzin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually those "Ext4" data corruption issues that set the Internet all ablaze (including Slashdot) were mainly due to KDE 4 not handling metadata correctly. In the end, it wasn't an Ext4 issue. However, feel free to spread FUD.

      Bullshit. The error was very generic and not limited to KDE

      You're right: it's a common application programming error.

      At what frequency does a bug cease to be a bug?

      I wish I'd known that I could promote myself up out of the rank of `amateur' just by pointing out that there were plenty of other people who weren't any more skilled than I was--that would have obviated all of these years of study and hard work.

      --
      -rozzin.
    19. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by MrHanky · · Score: 1

      Why the hell would you urge users to stick with an older FS when the newer and better one needs testing? You should urge users to back up their important data.

      EXT4 is a huge improvement on EXT3, and even if the FS won't fail, the physical hard drive will.

    20. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by BikeHelmet · · Score: 1

      I've heard bad things about Ext4 corrupting data.

      They're mostly overblown. Bad things can happen if you lose power, but that applies to any FS. Buy a UPS.

      I urge Linux users to stick to ext3 for the protection of your data.

      I urge linux users to stick to ext2. Windows and BSD have ext2 support(But Windows may require extra software), so if you ever want to try the little red guy out, or go back to Windows for gaming, you'll be cursing if you went ext3. :P

      Unless, of course, your distro uses 128KB inodes(mostly supported) rather than 256KB. (newer distros)

      That's why openSUSE now includes a desktop kernel specially tuned for desktop users.

      Ubuntu could take a tip from these guys!

    21. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Kjella · · Score: 3, Insightful

      KDE 4 wasn't following POSIX standards for writing to a HDD.

      You sir, are an idiot.

      Read the bug report.

      I'll give you some quotes:

      After a clean reboot pretty much any file written to by any application (during the previous boot) was 0 bytes.
      For example Plasma and some of the KDE core config files were reset. Also some of my MySQL databases were killed...

      -- Bogdan Gribincea

      The files that were zeroed when my machine hardlocked I'd imagine were the ones that were in use; my desktop env is Gnome and I was running a game in Wine. Wine's reg files which it would have had open were wiped and also my Gnome terminal settings were wiped.

      -- Ben Hodgetts

      I'm using 2.6.28-8-generic and a crash just zeroed out a _load_ of important files in my git repository which I'd recently rebased a patch series in.

      -- Peter Cliffton

      Ack... had a power outage and ran into this one today too. Several configuration files from programs I was running ended up trashed. This also explains the corruption I've seen of my BOINC/SETI files when hard-rebooting in past weeks.

      -- 3vi1

      I did mix up 30 minutes and 30 seconds. But that's just an example of tons of different applications, databases, source files, Gnome settings and whatever cleaned out by this BUG. Why you keep denying it I don't know, but at least you earned youself a foe rating for it.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    22. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Not to mention a part of the culprit is the fact that Ubuntu keeps shipping completely broken KDE packages. If they didn't ship broken packages, these crashes wouldn't have occured.

      So your solution to a file system that goes to hell when machines crash is to make machines that don't crash? Your excuses are terrible.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    23. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      The KDE 4 devs themselves admitted it was their fault for not using Fsync.

      Any file they were opening and trying to create metadata for (any file they could with Strigi/Nepomuk) they were touching and fucking up.

      The issue was the Strigi had a whole bunch of files in a state of flux at once during the crashes.

      Again, KDE fucked up, and Ubuntu fucked up with bad packages that were causing crashes. KDE has since been fixed. No one had reported massive Ext4 file corruption who wasn't running that version of KDE 4.

      And mark me as a foe all you want. You're one less idiot I have to deal with. However, all you have are initial reports from users who didn't know what the issue was. I'm going off the final resolution from the people who identified the issue, took credit, and fixed it. If you want to ignore that, then go right ahead.

      That makes you the idiot.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    24. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      Name one file system on the planet that is 100% guaranteed never to have an issue when the computer crashes.

      Ext4, just like Ext3, is designed to safe guard against crash issues by implementing a journal.

      The issue at hand was a KDE 4 bug in their little indexer that decided to scan your HDD and try to attach meta-data to the various files on your HDD. KDE 4 screwed the pooch. That doesn't make Ext4 unstable.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    25. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by jeffstar · · Score: 1

      Actually those "Ext4" data corruption issues that set the Internet all ablaze (including Slashdot) were mainly due to KDE 4 not handling metadata correctly. In the end, it wasn't an Ext4 issue. However, feel free to spread FUD.

      Really?

      Looks like there was a real problem with ext4 that had nothing to do with KDE.

    26. Re:Ext4 makes me nervous as Hell. by bcmm · · Score: 1

      You just demonstrated that KDE was following de facto standards. That isn't the same thing as following POSIX standards.

      I don't have an agenda here; I'm actually pretty much a KDE fanboy, but listing other people who made the same mistake (according to comments on a launchpad bug) doesn't make a spot of difference to what POSIX says.

      --
      # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
      Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
  15. "or just grab the torrents " by rickb928 · · Score: 5, Funny

    There you go again, egging us on to use such tools with no legitimate use for actual *legal* purposes.

    Somewhere, the CEOs of Comcast, Time-Warner, the RIAA, and AT&T have collectively felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if most of their objections to actual legitimate Internet use were suddenly silenced...

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  16. Upstart, DeviceKit, etc. by Enderandrew · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Congrats first and foremost to everyone who worked on this release.

    I use and love openSUSE. I've been running betas of 11.2 for a while now.

    My only gripe is that openSUSE still apparently hasn't switched to Upstart, nor DeviceKit. I assume Novell's layoffs last year are the reason that openSUSE seems to be falling a little behind in feature adoption. I hope this isn't a growing trend.

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
  17. huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Verify your download (optional, for experts)"

    how about:

    "Verify your download (mandatory, for everybody)"

  18. Re:Who...cares? by Disgruntled+Goats · · Score: 1

    (I tend to think the other way: How can I run Nautilus, KTorrent, KRDC, and GMountISO in Windows.)

    By installing KDE for Windows.

  19. Re:Who...cares? by TheNinjaroach · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So not being able to run native apps to buy from iTunes, sync my iPod and iPhone

    It's almost like you blame Linux for the fact your hardware vendor tries so hard to lock out 3rd party support.

    --
    I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
  20. Re:But... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

    Suse 9.something worked out of the box for me, when Windows wouldn't. I installed a half dozen different distros, before I found a 64 bit OS that "just worked". In fact, that was the straw that broke the camel's back. I disowned Microsoft within days after purchasing my first 64 bit Opteron.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  21. Re:But... by Rip+Dick · · Score: 1

    Wifi is sketchy on my Toshiba Satellite. If the network requires a WEP key or anything, it just wont connect sometimes... no matter how many times I mess with the settings. I liked OpenSuse (11.1 I believe) and KDE, but it was too annoying to use daily, as I'm always changing wireless networks.

  22. Re:But... by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

    10.1 and 10.3 and wifi worked fine for me (I actually really liked 10.3 and was excited ... until 11.0), 10.2 and 11.0 weren't so great.

  23. Re:Who...cares? by CannonballHead · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's almost like you blame Linux for the fact your hardware vendor tries so hard to lock out 3rd party support.

    You're right. Some people do. Because Linux "evangelists" like to say that Linux can do everything Windows can do.. .except better, AND it's more secure, AND it's free, AND it has a GREAT community.

    MOST of which is true. It may or may not be better, it is more secure and it's free and it does have a good community (there are plenty of Windows communities as well, of course).

    But it does not do everything Windows can do, because not everything runs on Linux. And most people do not want to lose hardware that works well for them for the sake of switching to Linux. Like iPods and iPhones.

    Sure, blame Apple and not Linux for the actual hardware issue (interesting: Apple is a great company at Slashdot until it is convenient for it not to be a great company at Slashdot :) my experience, anyways)... but blame Linux fans for claiming things that either aren't true or are only true if you are more committed to using Linux than using your existing proprietary hardware. Some people care more about their existing hardware that works well and that they like than whether or not it works with Linux. And it's a perfectly valid reason, too. Doesn't mean Linux is bad, it just means some people have different priorities.

  24. Re:Who...cares? by Vahokif · · Score: 1

    (I tend to think the other way: How can I run Nautilus, KTorrent, KRDC, and GMountISO in Windows.)

    Explorer, uTorrent, built-in remote desktop or VNC client of your choice and Daemon Tools, respectively. The issue isn't with specific software but functionality, and you aren't helping Linux by pretending that it can natively do everything Average Joe wants.

  25. Re:But... by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 1

    I have the opposite experience. Windows XP and later work out-of-the-box on my system, but OpenSUSE never has. I started with 9, and also tried 10.1, 10.2, and 11. The system typically works fine from LiveCD, giving me false hope, but installation always fails to produce what I'd call a usable system. Anything from no sound or no network to X not starting. I tend to just get frustrated and go back to Windows. It's too bad. I want to run something other than XP or Ubuntu, but those are the only systems that work well with the PC.

    --
    The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
  26. I certainly don't anymore by Santana · · Score: 1

    Don't get me wrong, please.

    I love KDE since 1.x. I've always hated GNOME since it was shipping with RH 5.2.

    But I've been waiting for KDE and the whole Linux desktop experience to be good, and 11 years have passed.

    Today, I have embraced Mac OS X for my personal desktop, and *love* it: I'm not looking back any more; I use OpenBSD for most of my servers of course; and for the PCs at work, I have succumbed to Ubuntu, a very customized Ubuntu that doesn't expose a whole desktop, but just a dock with only the applications the users need for work.

    I fail to see why an easy to use desktop on Linux is needed any more, because all my three uses for a computer are already perfectly covered.

    Not that I would reject using Linux as a desktop somewhere. Heck, I have used OpenBSD as a desktop. But just because I want to contribute to the project, or learn their internals. And for my users, it's better for them and for the company/institution that forget that they have a "Personal Computer": they don't; the machine in front of them is just a tool to get their job done. Then a whole desktop is overkill.

    --
    The best way to predict the future is to invent it
    1. Re:I certainly don't anymore by jamboarder · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oh please just shut up and go away.... Ok, OS X is nice. It's pretty. It does a lot of things well. It "just works". It "gets out of my way". blah, blah, blah. Great, good to hear it... for the bazzilionth time...

      Look if there actually exist Linux folk who haven't heard how uber-awesome OS X is, they invariably live under a rock in some deep hole... deliberately. They don't want to come out. For the many of the rest of us who don't live in said hole, guess what? We choose to use (openSuse/Ubuntu/Arch/Mandriva) Linux despite OS X. Why? Cuz we are absolute nutcases who have nothing better to do than to use the piece(s) of software we like.

  27. How's the Upgrade? by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

    I'd like to hear from users who have upgraded from the previous release (as opposed to performing a new installation).

    How did you perform the upgrade?

    How did it go?

    Did anything that was working before stop working?

    Is there anything in the new version that you like so much you don't want to go back to the old version anymore?

    --
    Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  28. Re:Who...cares? by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

    For some i[insert word]s anyways, yes.

    Doesn't exactly look simple or easy or "better" ...

    If your iPod database has become corrupted (because you disconnected your device at an unfortunate point in time, because of an Amarok failure, ...)

    Heh. :)

  29. Re:Who...cares? by selven · · Score: 1

    I don't see any of this "Apple is a great company" stuff at Slashdot. Most comments about it are actually complaining about DRM and the closed-source nature of Apple products. The only positive comments I ever see about it are comparing it to Windows.

  30. Re:Who...cares? by Anonymous+Cowpat · · Score: 1

    Wine Is Not an Emulator

    --
    FGD 135
  31. Re:Who...cares? by kimvette · · Score: 1

    interesting: Apple is a great company at Slashdot until it is convenient for it not to be a great company at Slashdot :)

    On the contrary: some of us think Apple is a fairly crappy company which happens to offer a few decent products (OS X, iPhone, iPod, etc.) , and it is unfortunate that Apple sometimes takes steps to cripple some products after the point of purchase (tethering/iPhone).

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  32. Re:But... by oatworm · · Score: 1

    Sure it is. It's just not ready for the laptop.

  33. Re:Who...cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    See now that's the problem with Linux evangelists. Some partial, hacked together, and buggy functionality is described as "supported."

    In the Linux world "supported" often means someone somewhere got some limited sort of functionality, here's a link to sourceforge, rtfm, good luck. Which gets spun by some pencil-neck geek into "It works what more could you want?"

    It's not so much that sometimes devices don't work to their full potential that bothers me. It's the bullshit amount of effort put setting people up for disappointment by saying everything works the same and better than it does on Windows. For many things its true, Linux owns. Sure. But stop fucking trumping up shit that sorta works as "supported."

  34. Re:Who...cares? by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

    The only positive comments I ever see about it are comparing it to Windows.

    That happens quite frequently, which may be why I feel the Apple-is-cool vibe/Mac-is-better or whatever. :)

  35. Re:Who...cares? by E+IS+mC(Square) · · Score: 3, Funny

    >> So not being able to run native apps to buy from iTunes, sync my iPod and iPhone

    You are saying as if it is a bad thing.

  36. Re:Who...cares? by filesiteguy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Explorer - as I use it daily in expee, Vista and Win7 - is not as well-designed as either Nautilus or Konqueror. I find it lacking on many counts.

    As for me "pretending that" Linux can do everything Average Joe wants, I don't. It does what I want, it works for my mother. It works for my two boys.

    There are things that are needed - for those I run VirtualBox:

    http://www.perfectreign.com/stuff/2009/virtualbox_xp_vb6.jpg

    and can do such tasks as Visual Basic 6.0 development on XP machines. The rest can pretty much be done using FOSS under Ubuntu.

  37. Re:But... by apharmdq · · Score: 1

    In my experience, most Linux distributions come with wifi drivers that work for just about any machine nowadays. The main issue is the software, and often the default software is lacking for some activities. However, WICD is an excellent alternative to the default network managers, and it has always worked flawlessly for me.
    (There was an issue with hidden static networks recently, but from what I gather, that's been fixed in the latest version.)

  38. Re:Who...cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It's pretty pivotal if you own and want to sync an iPod or iPhone. Or if, for whatever reason (such as exclusive tracks) you want to buy something from iTunes.

    For some reason people have modded you insightful. Fortunately, I'll be left modded at zero.

  39. Has your webcam ever showed up in Yast's Hardware? by Provocateur · · Score: 1

    Or will they forever be classed as the gypsies of the Linux universe, shunned by most distros? If your
    webcam ever ever showed up in yast, then maybe I shall hold my tongue, and instead start singing
    hosannas to its superiority. In 11.0, 'Scanners' iirc showed up. Almost, but not quite.

    --
    WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
  40. Re:But... by justthinkit · · Score: 1

    I liked OpenSuse (11.1 I believe)

    I call B.S. The average slashdotter knows his version number to 6 digits. Mine is 5.1.2600 and I've grown rather fond of it. The idea that some day I would start calling it "5.1 I believe" is repulsive.

    --
    I come here for the love
  41. Re:Who...cares? by TangoCharlie · · Score: 1

    I agree.

    And, IBM will never be replaced as the dominant PC manufacturer.

    --
    return 0; }
  42. Re:But... by oatworm · · Score: 1

    In all seriousness, Ubuntu's worked pretty well on my laptop, too. Wireless was a little finicky (Broadcom - ugh!), but nothing ndiswrapper couldn't fix. I will also go on record and say that I absolutely LOVE EnvyNG, which has done a fine job of addressing driver-related issues that I originally had back in the day.

    One other thing I first noticed about Ubuntu and Linux in general: When you plug in a USB keyboard or mouse, it doesn't take a minute for the OS to recognize it like it does in Windows. Ah... bliss.

  43. Re:Who...cares? by E+IS+mC(Square) · · Score: 1

    Hey, to each its own. I value my freedom to do whatever I want with devices I have paid from my hard-earned cash and stay clear from Apple products (or for that matter, any , which will lock me in).

    But I found parent's point backwards - just because he has locked himself into a particular system does not give him any right to cry about other systems that do not support his toys. Since when it is Linux or open source's fault that itunes/ipod/iphone are not compatible with their OS?

  44. Re:Who...cares? by Kjella · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You are saying as if it is a bad thing.

    Isolated, learning one new way to do something is an acceptable cost. But Linux is to many death by a thousand cuts when it comes to that. I dabbled with Linux for ~7 years before I finally decided to switch and there was many reasons for that. But one of them was the total lack of any familiar application, even though I was fairly convinced Linux probably had some sort of application like that (in retrospect, sometimes a doubtful conclusion) but it was always too much new. I can set off some hours to learn something new, I can't set off a month all at once to learn everything new. It was really only the early experiences with Vista that pushed me over the edge, thinking this wasn't the way forward. Now that I know how to use Linux properly I wouldn't switch back, but that wall is too tall. Not one brick individually but all of the piled on top of each other.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  45. Re:But... by genericpoweruser · · Score: 1

    5.1.2600 is the kernel version for XP Pro. OpenSUSE 11.1 is the release name, and if I'm not mistaken its kernel was 2.6.27.

    --
    A fool and his lamb are worth two in the bush.
  46. Re:Who...cares? by cbhacking · · Score: 1

    Most of KDE4 has actually been ported to Windows as native binaries (using qt4, which is open-source across all platforms). http://windows.kde.org/ . Still very much a work in progress, but many things (like Kate, possibly my favorite text editor) work great. It has a simple graphical package management tool that allows you to select the KDE packages you want, update them, or uninstall them (and will automatically grab dependencies for you).

    For other Unix-y programs, I've found that the native POSIX support in NT is good enough that quite a few programs simply compile and run without a problem. You'll need to install Interix (operating environment for the POSIX subsystem of NT) and its build toolchain (GCC based, though you can use the Microsoft build tools instead if you want). You'll probably also want to grab some of the nice pre-compiled binaries (such as bash, subversion, X11R7 libraries, and gcc4) from the SUA Community folks. Lots of info on this here: http://suacommunity.com/

    In theory, you could actually compile KDE on Interix. Not sure anybody has put in the effort though; porting something that size is sure to run into hassles.

    --
    There's no place I could be, since I've found Serenity...
  47. Re:Who...cares? by E+IS+mC(Square) · · Score: 1

    Brilliant! I would not have been able to put it in a better way.

    Of course, Ubuntu or any other distro based on Linux has its own learning curve. And I would not (and do not) advise it to everybody.

    But when discussing this with /. crowd, I expect a certain level of computer-savvy-ness, and their ability to learn doing things in different ways. It is indeed a tall wall (no matter how much 'desktop ready' it may feel), but then, I set myself up in a way that I know I have a way out with Linux (i.e. not building a collection of gadgets which would not work with a central system at my home). If this includes sacrificing some toys which are 'cool', and 'hip', so be it. As long as I get my ends met with different means, and I know how to deal with the 'different' means, I am fine with it (bud would not advise it to any or every body).

  48. Re:Who...cares? by Risen888 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You really should have bought a real mp3 player. I hope you learned something.

    --
    Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
  49. Re:But... by V!NCENT · · Score: 1

    Try out a LiveCD/DVD iso. You can even put it on a USB stick with unetbootin*.

    First format the USB stick in Windows as Fat32. Then run unetbootin with admin privileges. Make sure Windows has already mounted the USB stick before you run the tool and check what the mount point is called (F:\, E:\, etc)

    Jesus...

    * http://unetbootin.sourceforge.net/

    --
    Here be signatures
  50. Re:But... by V!NCENT · · Score: 1

    Luckily SuSE was the only one doing it because back then NTFS support SUCKED!

    --
    Here be signatures
  51. Re:But... by V!NCENT · · Score: 1

    It has better batterylife than Vista and Windows 7. You can browse the web, with flash too. You can manage and play your music and video's. You can edit video's with Kdenlive, which is about just as good as Sony Vegas, if not better. You can chat with all messenger protocols. You can import and export MS Office documents, spreadsheets and presentations (unless you are among those macro wizzards that can do raytracing with Excel ;-) ). It has a WiFi manager*, powermanagement and a next generation desktop environment/GUI. You can burn you music and videos and play them just the same... You can do all kinds of shit.

    * If your WiFi card is supported. Today Linux supports about 30% of all network cards out there fully, and 40% partialy. Check out a LiveCD iso to see if everything will work ;)

    --
    Here be signatures
  52. Re:But... by V!NCENT · · Score: 1

    PS: It has multi-channel audio too, so what more can you possible want from a laptop?

    --
    Here be signatures
  53. Re:But... by V!NCENT · · Score: 1

    What's on the LiveCD will be installed on your HDD. Are you sure your HDD isn't failing? If not, please considder trying out future releases of Ubuntu ;)

    --
    Here be signatures
  54. Re:But... by V!NCENT · · Score: 1

    WICD should become the default backend for every Linux distro IMHO. It supports the mschapv2 protocol, which is required for most secured Windows log-in networks.

    --
    Here be signatures
  55. Re:But... by oliderid · · Score: 1

    Same for me on Compaq laptop almost a year ago. I had to find non-official packages to make it run with my SuSE. It took me hours. Those packages have finally been added to the repos few months after. I don't critize nobody, I'm mean they do a great job and this is free, so what could you say? Anyway the fact is WI-FI is often difficult to install on Linux and you have to know it. Ideally you would have to document yourself on the wifi used by the laptop you plan to purchase first (a thing I never do :-)). Just like printers support few years ago. Claiming that there is no problem won't help anybody IMHO.

  56. Because all other Linux distros are illegal by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    Just ask Microsoft.

    As I understand it: Microsoft has claimed they will not sue novell linux users for infringing on msft patents. Msft claims that linux infringes on several msft patents, although msft will not specify exactly which patents. If you use any linux distro other than novell, msft might sue you.

    And don't forget to pay scox $699 for each CPU, if you run linux. Thank msft for that also.

  57. Re:But... by justthinkit · · Score: 1

    I was going for humor but I guess it whooshed over everyone's heads.

    The humor being that the person couldn't remember the version of the OS they had used, when it was the previous version to the one just released. Explaining feeble attempts at humor is like taking a straw and sucking the air out of a room. I doubt I'll be here all week.

    --
    I come here for the love
  58. vs Mandriva by gr8dude · · Score: 1

    I am curious what its advantages are over Mandriva; just a few days ago someone wrote the same thing about it - "Mandriva provides the best KDE4 experience".

    It was also said that it has the most easy to use administration interface too.

    I'm asking this as a GNOME user who decided to give KDE4 a try, so I hope you can shed some light on the subject.

    1. Re:vs Mandriva by Krondor · · Score: 1

      I honestly don't know too much about Mandriva these days. I was an avid Mandrake user until they stir up (some time back).

      Looking at the latest release notes there are some interesting things. Looks like a lot of work into 1 click install of codecs, firmware, etc...

      I would still hypothesize that OpenSUSE would have the better KDE4 experience, due to the work done to KDEify Firefox and OpenOffice (though I do see Mandriva uses Go-OO). The OpenSUSE Build service as well seems to keep a lot more software options packaged for SUSE then other RPM variants (with of course Ubuntu leading the charge for prepackaged binaries).

      I think I might give Mandriva another look though since it has been so long since I considered them.

  59. Re:But... by Down_in_the_Park · · Score: 1

    Come on, look at the numbers (uid) he's still learning...humor, irony, all that B.S.

    --
    "People who are willing to sacrifice essential freedoms for security deserve neither freedom nor security."

    B F