Slashdot Mirror
Debian 7.0 ("Wheezy") Released
First time accepted submitter anarcat writes "After two years since the last Debian release (6.0, nicknamed "squeeze"), the Debian release team has finally published Debian 7.0 (nicknamed "Wheezy"). A newly created blog has details on the release, which features multi-arch support (e.g. you can now install packages for both i386 and amd64 on the same install), improvements to multimedia support (no need for third party repositories!) and improved security through hardening flags. Debian 7.0 also ships with the controversial Gnome 3 release, and the release notes explicitly mention how to revert to the more familiar 'Gnome classic' interface. Finally, we can also mention the improved support for virtualization infrastructure with pre-built images available for Amazon EC2, Windows Azure and Google Compute Engine. Debian 7.0 also ships with the OpenStack suite and the Xen Cloud Platform. More details on the improvements can be found in the release notes and the Debian wiki." An anonymous reader points out (from the announcement) that "[t]he installation process has been greatly improved: Debian can now be installed using software speech, above all by visually impaired people who do not use a Braille device. Thanks to the combined efforts of a huge number of translators, the installation system is available in 73 languages, and more than a dozen of them are available for speech synthesis too.
In addition, for the first time, Debian supports installation and booting using UEFI for new 64-bit PCs (amd64), although there is no support for Secure Boot yet."
http://memepai.blogspot.com.br/
It took a while, but all the effort was worth it.
When will Ubuntu use this debian ?
Heh, kernel 3.2... this OS comes outdated out of the box.
anyone else who can't get the image of a blind man trying to install debian out of their heads?
73+23 languages? are the debian guys privvy to some information about a huge poisoning coming up causing blindness? are they worried that porn causes loss of vision?
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
No normal people use Linux on the desktop/laptop. It's success is now on the tablet and the backend/embeded systems, not typical machines.
Give it up Debian. You've failed, your lives are worthless. Kill yourselves fool and let Windows rule like it has for nearly 20 years.
...indeed!
As someone that is new to Linux I've always found Debian to be somewhat weird. I guess a lot of Debian users uses it since they are used to it. But as a new Linux user, why would I use Debian when the software is so old and outdated? We're at Firefox 20 and Debian has only version 10. OK that Firefox revs every six weeks, but you get the point. If it's old from day one then how old won't it be when Debian 8 is released.
Ecellent, may we now hope for Steam support?
That U****u advantage has been so annoying I almost switched.
There are so many I wish to play natively!
How well does that go, from people who have actually done it?
Looks like debian is still using Apache 2.2.... no wonder nginx is gaining ground. Apache 2.4 has OCSP stapling support which gives a huge boost to SSL performance.
Im sorry but the concept of since its old its very stable is non-sense, i havent seen an actual "unstable" kernel in years (2007 was the last time i seen a kernel panic for no apparant reason)
Debian could ship a system with kernel 3.8 and the newer stuff that most distros use and be just as stable instead all 3 of their branches (stable, testing and unstable) are equally old and all 3 have kernel 3.2.0, whats the point of unstable if its packages arnt all that much newer to begin with.
the fact that everyone who runs debian runs the testing version just makes my point, debian needs to have a revival, it could be a hot system that everyone uses if they would get their head out of the dark ages, they can keep a "server" version for those who want the old moldy stability they seek, but the desktop version of debian should be cutting edge, it has to be to keep up. Debian has been in this lousy state for years, theres no reason ubuntu/mint should even have to exist (not that they fix debian that much anyways, cross-compiling is a mess, even though it works fine on any non-debian distro)
but thats the way it is i guess, and thats why i am glad Manjaro Linux exists. Debian development has 2 speeds: slow and slower and if they develop any slower their gonna grow roots and demand daily waterings.
Until you put it under load on a mission critical server somewhere.
To offset political mods, replace Flamebait with Insightful.
The manual reads like a bureaucratic run around, it makes my head spin.
It used to be so simple to install any linux. Every OS could burn an ISO you would burn the ISO and if you choose the right ISO for the right hardware it would boot and install to the harddisk. Now I don't have any moterized drives at all on this 'ivy bridge' hardware and the USB guide is spread all over the guide.
It should say "drop this onto a fat32 formatted USB disk (or stick), the factory usually already formatted fat32 for you. Start your computer with this USB stick to run the installer. The installer will load everything on the USB stick into the internal work memory (called RAM) so you can safely choose to install Debian onto the USB stick (or any other available locations) and even allow the installer to reformat USB stick to the optimal filesystem for running Debian. (Which for Wheezy is EXT4 plus sometimes a boot partition is the hardware requires it start)"
But no it just says 'prepare a USB stick' and something related somewhere else and I am left guessing what exactly their lingo means, what fits together, how it will all add up, and what it will do.
Here's your quick and easy way to give back. I don't code in c/c++, I hate writing documentation, so share some bandwidth and seed the torrents for a few hours or a few gb.
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
re: for many people it's not the main OS but more like a solid reference implementation.
.
That others use Debian as their "backroom workshop" does not define Debian's true role, no more than one person using another person as a slave manifests that slavery as being the defining characteristic of that other person.
.
I disagree with your statement that debain's role has changed "more towards being a professional backroom workshop for other distributions". Debian has stayed being what it has always been. It's just being used more as the foundation that supports the work of the facade builders and marketers that put a pretty face (or not-so-pretty Tammy Faye Baker clown-makeup face, if you want Gnome 3, imho) on top of all that and market it as if they made the whole thing.
.
I agree that Debian is a solid implementation. But I disagree with your contention that it's more like a solid reference implementation. A "reference implementation" would imply that it is a demo of some of the capabilities of what can be done and that others are to build upon it. (whoops, the second half of that sentence is actually true! That's exactly what GNU's GPL licensing allows!) A "reference implementation" implies that it's built specifically just to be a partial implementation, which debian definitely is not. While others may build atop Debian, that is not Debian's sole purpose.
.
For details on Debian's purpose, see Debian's own documentation about their "social contract", or read about it on articles about it.
.
For info about how it started and about Debian's manifesto, read about the Ian who makes up the "-ian" half of "debian" or read the original Debian Manifesto .
Why Multiarch when we should have LOL64 - Linux on Linux64 - where you can install to /usr/bin (x86)/ and "it just works".
I really like the emphasis on stability, but for web browsers I think it is a problem. Debian 7.0 ships with Iceweasel (Firefox) 10.0.12esr that is EOL. The security updates will be backported, but with the many changes to the next supported ESR, it may not be possible to backport all security updates. Considering that the browsers these days are major targets, I would rather have a possible more unstable browser, but a browser with the latest security updates.
This is only a problem if You want to use Debian as a desktop OS. When installing as a server OS, the older but more stable packages, is perfect for my taste.
Is ext2 still considered outdated and useless?
the fact that everyone who runs debian runs the testing version just makes my point
Except not everyone does. Most machines under my control run Debian stable, because I don't want any trouble from them. I just need them to do their job.
Good model -- Debian as an oak tree. Doesn't need 'watering', by the way, because it has such a well-developed root system!
They really mean they "upgraded" Debian kernel to v3.2 from January 2012?
Ah!
Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
Mostly because Torvolds is still an asshole.
Why Microsoft doesn't just fork the kernel and crush the linux competition once and for all is puzzling. Except to say, free labor is very profitable to them.
Im sorry but the concept of since its old its very stable is non-sense
Bad premise. This appears to imply that the goal is to run old stuff. The concept of "Since it has been tested well, it's very stable" is where Debian is. New kernel means everything needs retesting. Are you volunteering the time and equipment to run that kind of testing? And it's not just the kernel that needs retesting, it's all of the rest of the packages. (I haven't checked to see if they want to ensure that the kernel is the same rev on all platforms as well...)
Debian could ship a system with kernel 3.8 and the newer stuff that most distros use and be just as stable
Maybe. But without the testing to back it up, that's too much of a risk. Now that Debian 7 has been released, I kinda expect the latest kernel to be making its way into experimental and then unstable soon. You can run a mixed branch installation should you so choose. Use stable for most everything, and bring Iceweasel in from testing (or even unstable).
I believe that Debian is geared towards the professional user, one that needs a functional and stable desktop, where tools are tested, and which can be used to develop and deploy applications in public servers. If you compare Debian with Redhat and Suse, you will see that they are even older than Debian! Debian is a great tool that you can master.
On the other hand, most of the Shiny New distros cater to the ocasional user, the one that may use a browser, watch a movie or chat. They dont need as much stability, since they can always reset their desktop, nor do they need to install third party hardware or software. This kind of user doesn't care if every single application is replaced during an upgrade, because they never develop a deep mastery of any tool, they can always continue clicking here and there to get a few things done, spending most of their time tweaking the wallpaper.
Good luck with running testing. In my experience what you run and how often you upgrade varies in the cycle. Starting with a fresh stable is always a good starting point. Testing has a point where its preferable but for a while in the cycle its more likely to break than unstable with selected package upgrades.
Depending on the role of the machine I can vary between clean stable, stable/testing mixed. unstable with selected upgrades (ie not dist-upgrade) and specific experimental prackages. And thats just the official sources. Grab newer kernels from liquorix, nginx from them. There is a large ecosystem of sources and with a little knowledge and a few precausions can be used safely.
Good point, but you got it wrong from the very beginning though: it's not ``since it's old it's stable'', it's ``since it's in Debian stable, it's stable''.
For a distro that prides itself on being cantankerous, out of date, creaky and smelly wheezy is the perfect name.
I guess old fart or decrepit or rotting would be too accurate.
Fish don't fry in the kitchen,
Beans don't burn on the grill.
Took a whole lot of trying
Just to get up that hill.
Now we're up in the big leagues,
Gettin our turn at bat.
As long as we live
It's you and me baby.
There ain't nothing wrong with that.
Im sorry but the concept of since its old its very stable is non-sense,
There's a difference between "It's been tested to actually work in under condition X with config Y" and being "old". Also, there's another name for a diehard... Hard to Kill.
Except of course that Debian is not the go to server distro...
Old!=stable That debian believes it and its fanboys parrot it just makes it a distro to avoid.
I'd like to remind people, too, that "mission critical" doesn't necessarily mean anything pretentious or imply it's only for the "big boys." Your wife's TV show file server is mission critical. So is her PVR front end. It's your e-peen in the other room where you play games or develop stuff, which is ok to crash every 6 months.
Debian is no more stable than a modern distro such as opensuse 12.3.
the thing is, if you want to use debian as a server, fine use the old stable version, which _is_ old.....period, well tested...yes it is but in the end because its OLDER than the stuff other distros have. Its sad people still use the linux is good for servers bit. (well at least instead of linux your all saying debian is good for servers, though i wouldnt even use it for that myself)
I run linux on a desktop, stable and old = not useful to me, I want the new stuff, i want all the latest goodies in the newest release of wine, i want the new performance fixes in the latest nvidia driver, i want the safety and security of using firefox 20.0 instead 10.0, more importantly linux is a moving target, always has been, linux is not BSD, so it cant get away with sitting still.
Debian could just as easily have a stable version for servers and a hot cutting edge version for everyone else but instead we got: Petrified, moldy and stale.
Debian is supposed to be a universal operating system, but i havent found a use for it yet. Using outdated stuff on a desktop isnt alot of fun and dealing with quirks and glitches that were squashed literally years ago on other systems (fedora cough......manjaro cough......arch if you can survive the install cough...)
isnt fun either.
Linux 3.2 will be supported until 2015. That's longer than the support lifetime for any other kernel version at the moment, unless the maintainer for 3.4 decides to support it past 2014. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel#Maintenance
You have a curious definition of "fact". I, for one, run Debian Stable on both my desktop and my laptop.
Why? That already exists in other distros. If I wanted cutting-edge, I could have it. I use Debian precisely because I got tired of all the constant changes and wanted some stability. Not stability in the sense of "no crashes", but stability in the sense of "let's actually keep the same technology for more than three months before everyone gets bored of maintaining it and starts a rewrite from scratch".
Why are you so offended by the idea of a distro having different goals? Why are you so threatened by the existence of a thing that is not what you personally want? I don't mind that Ubuntu, Mint, and Fedora don't offer what I want; why do you care that Debian doesn't offer what you want?
Just installed it on my old box, Pentium II, 8.5GB HDD and 96MB RAM. Most of other modern distros hanged in the installer.. It's simply works and the installation is very easy.
i havent seen an actual "unstable" kernel in years (2007 was the last time i seen a kernel panic for no apparant reason)
Honestly you aren't trying hard enough or running enough machines. I hit 3 new kernel bugs in the last 3 years, 2 of which were scheduler related, 1 of which was never previously reported. All 3 have been fixed upstream and backported.
Debian does ship a system with kernel 3.8. It's called "experimental". I'm running Debian with this kernel, all packaged nice and neatly, installed using Debian's standard package commands.
Funnily enough, I hit a problem with it. My wireless card occasionally drops connection. Works flawlessly under 3.2, though. I haven't traced the problem yet, but when using my wireless, I boot up into 3.2 for the moment.
The summary may have missed this, but Debian now provide a live CD image. To me, that's probably the biggest news for this release.
Yeah, where I work, we are not allowed to run any testing versions. Has to be the supported stable versions.