Posted by
CmdrTaco
on from the here-comes-slink dept.
An anonymous reader wrote in to tell us that
Debian has scheduled
March 2
as the official release date for v2.1 (codename: Slink) of their distribution.
96 comments
Looking forward to getting a CD
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I've been holding my breath since the Freeze last Nov.;)
I know that Debian is well suited for online installs, but to those of us with slow/unreliable modem connections, a 5 hour apt-get is just not practicle, particlularly for those with expensive connections in Europe.
Otherwise, kudos to the Debian developers. I know there recently was some grumbling on the devel list about the freeze taking too long. I sorta felt frustrated about that too, but in the end it's good to get something of top-rate quality.
The Down Side..
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The down side to freezing something for so long is that Debian has become dated. That's not a good thing to have. Especially since there are so many new things coming out EVERY SINGLE DAY!
A word to Debian, perhaps you need to revise the process. Only worry about criticals in the BASE distribution and mark updated products in BASE as "grave" for the reason of Out of date.
JH
I love this
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I love comments like these. Really. The more irrelevent to the subject the better. Makes my day.
In addition...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
...to all the other excellent comments, I'd like to point out that you can still happily download debs from frozen or unstable branches of Debian with the expectancy that they'll work with a minimum of fuss.
I upgraded to PostgreSQL 6.4.2-5 via the above method. Granted it took more time than with apt, but it was faster than waiting for potato to to stable...
well...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I love Debian, too. It's probably the easiest distro to maintain.
I doubt their political policies will change anytime soon, however. All of the Debian package stuff is probably GPL'd, so anyone that wanted could probably start their own Debian-like distro without policies that are as restrictive about non-free stuff as Debian's.
Politics...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Well, I for one like the fact that Debian does distinguish itself this clearly with the political aspect of the software. One of the primary goals is to have a completely free core distribution. AFAIK they are the only ones to take this into account in such a clear manner. You want less politics? Choose one of the many others available. Thats the beauty of choice.
Politics...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
What's the big deal? You can download all the non-free packages (that don't cost money, of course), from www.debian.org. They just don't include them on the CD.
Go Debian!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Yummi!, Already running slink and loving it. And now I can install slink on sparcs and Alphas... Go Debian! Debian is the right way to go. The ONLY Linux distribution that is mantained by a group of volunteers just like linux kernel is. Consequenly Debian is not a sellout like Red... Debian folks care more about substance, functionality and stability instead of flash and fast releases. If you are already familiar with unix or linux or not very lazy you should give it a try.
KDE sucks monkey butt holes!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Don't use KDE, unless you are a queer monkey.
Freedom.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Use RedHat. Debian was founded (iirc) for the freedom which you despise.
BTW - It is very easy to use non-free apps in Debian I have a few installed myself.
The Down Side..(NOT!)
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Debian freezes take a _while_. But the stable releases are rock solid. You are more likely to find bugs and other annoyances in a RedHat stable release than in Debian stable release. I speak from my experience
Cause and effect
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Has it occurred to you that the reason Debian is great is that the developers are committed and the reason they are committed is because of the "crappy" politics?
Well, if you haven't seen anything...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Umm..
Rpmfind (www.rpmfind.net) does an apt-get like thing rather well. \ JH
2.2
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
How difficult will it be to get the 2.2 kernel working on this? Will some of the packages have to be updated?
redhat 6.0
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
so does anyone know when the 6.0 version of redhat will be out?
Exactly!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
This is exactly what they want. They want a programmer to think "Man, this system is great. If only it came with a web browser [or whatever]". Then that programmer is much more likely to contribute time to creating a web browser that CAN be included.
The Debian method is infective just like the GPL is.
BTW, I use RedHat mostly because when I knew nothing that's what I stumbled across. But I'm getting interested in tryin Debian. Maybe I'll put it on my next computer.
2.2
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I've been running 2.2 on slink since its.pre days. I just downloaded the tarball and compiled it. (I know it's not debian's way but it works for me)
I like Debian, BUT...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I am running Debian on my system and I'm pleased with it, but I noticed that it has several problems.
The packages it ships with are outdated. For example, samba 2.0 has been released over a month ago and there is still no dpackage for it. This defeates the whole purpose of Debian's famous ease of upgrade. Oh, does 2.1 ship with samba 1.9.8p10, the same as 2.0?
I too am really annoyed with Debain zealots who have a grudge against anything non-GPL. Debian doesn't even ship with pine! Give me a break, people. (I know there is a source package for it but it's outdated and I haven't been able to compile it).
debian vs. redhat
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I've been using redhat for a while but stopped using it after I got debian, I think redhat is good for beginner, It's something to use the six first months that you have linux, then you should upgrade to debian.
You like Debian, BUT...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
You're too stupid to figure out how to unleash it's power
2.2
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I'm running 2.2.1 on slink and didn't have to update any packages:)
Sorry - I was wrong
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Sorry, I didn't find samba 2.0 under hamm or slink and I assumed it's not packaged yet. But can I install it on hamm?
But regarding pine, could you at least compile it and distribute the binary in the non-free section? After all, it's the most commonly used mail reader in the Linux (and Unix) community (I remember there was a/. poll about it).
netbase_xxx.deb
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Although 2.2 will work out-of-the-box on Slink, things like/sbin/ifconfig will show incorrect information about dropped packets etc. Grab the netbase package from potato and install it, and you'll be fine:-)
Regards, Gnuspice.
The Down Side..
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
How was the Redhat linuxconf and control panel broken?
www.rpmfind.net Vs. Apt
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Broke dependencies are not common on debian systems unlike on redhat (They freaking broke every day on RH 5.1) But if you really need to force something use
dpkg --ignore-depends=
see dpkg --help for other options
best of both worlds: YES
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Just make sure non-free, contrib, and non-US are enabled in/etc/apt/sources.list For example:
# Use for a local mirror - remove the ftp1 http lines for the bits # your mirror contains. # deb file:/your/mirror/here/debian stable main contrib non-free # See sources.list(5) for more information, especial # Remember that you can only use http, ftp or file URIs deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable non-US
You must be a novice to even post such a comment
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Look, I've used Linux for years. I can use Slackware, TurboLinux, Redhat, Caldera, or Debian
Why? Because I know how to use Linux. I am currently using RedHat. Yes, it has a lot of GUI tools for beginners. I don't use them however. I use RedHat because it usually has the newest stuff and with the exception of 5.0... it has been stable. One broken version of glibc shouldn't make you hate a distribution for forever.
You just want to _feel_ like you are using something better. I have news for you. Using a less popular distribution of Linux does not mean you are a better Linux user.
Get over your "My dog can run faster than your dog" attitude.
Shesh
www.rpmfind.net
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
RPMFIND does automatically get the dependant rpm's if they are not on your system. The ONLY difference between rpmfind and apt is that apt'll get and install them too.
Note, I'm not TRASHING debian.. but the argument that apt can install them after downloading is kinda fickle. An rpm -i/tmp/*.rpm will do that just as well.
JH
It's only a distribution...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I agree completely.
I use Red Hat, because I know how to. I haven't got the energy to spend learning how to fix all the "quirks" in a new distribution, and I always fiddle round with and upgrade so much stuff that it doesn't really matter to me if there are a few problems with what I started with.
And most people I know who use Debian seem to think they're l33t for doing so... now that Linux is becoming more mainstream, it's fashionable to slag off Red Hat. When Debian becomes really popular, all these "GO DEBIAN RED HAT SUX" posters will probably move on to BSD...
twit
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
>And you must be a newbie to post such a comment. >Anyone who has used linux for any decent amount >of time will realize Debian is the obvious >choice.
You must like to pick on people...
>At least I can stand behind my posts, something >you cant say for yourself
Gimme yer address and than let's see who stands behind their posts
twit
"Convenience"
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Concepts are sometimes associated with the wrong words. It is not accurate to say "convenience" is different from "freedom". The only reason I choose free software is for practical convenience: I don't wish to be fettered by closed standards, non-free libraries, or restrictive software. If freedom was not convenient, I would rather not have it; makes no sense to have freedom just for the sake of having it. Two clear-cut possibilities. Either freedom is always convenient, or always it is not. You cannot say, at some times freedom is convenient, and in other times it is not convenient; think about it, twist it all-you want, and you can see the fallacy of the middle-of-the-road solution. If you find proprietary more convenient, go with proprietary. No problem.
Not just a distribution
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Debian is not just a distribution, Debian is the peoples's distribution, What is Linux to Unix, Debian is to Linux. Do you want to influence decisions that affect your operating system? Become a Debian developer, and you are allowed to present technical arguments on all aspects pertaining to the distribution.
Most distributions (if not all) do not allow its users such privileges. Debian is different.
Debian, and it's stance
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Debian is a great distribution with some minor flaws. This can be said about ANY distribution. What I find amazing is that it's working. Now.. be careful, don't react quickly, because what I'm about to say may inflame some of you.
The entire GNU project is based on socialist beliefs. Debian, too, is based on a socialistic model. Now, this isn't bad, but history shows that socialist models do one of two things. One is become corrupt. Two is to collapse under it's own weight with beuracracy. There is ALWAYS the chance that it'd work, it's breaking one rule of the previous mentioned downfalls.
Debian keeps information free and flowing. This is a strong way to keep the system from going corrupt. If everyone knows the stance, the system as a whole takes on a persona/feeling of it's own. Debian , in that manner, best reflects the ideals and goals of the Linux community. For that, it's to be commended. The other way a socialist project fails is to collapse under it's own weight making sure everyone gets a say. This way is much more scary. Debian's bug tracking and release system, although phenomenal, are getting quite heavy. If Debian were to fail, this would be the method it fails.
All in all, I think I'm going to go back to Debian. I'll make my little changes and go on with my life. If ANY THING has made Linux suceed this long, it's been the esscence of freedom surrounding the intracices. Debian, better than any other distribution out there, exemplifies this process.
Jarrod H
Waiting for my Debian CD...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
(CheapBytes is being slow)
I'm curious, does anyone have anything bad to say about Debian, that's not related to their politics? Other than vauge moaning about dselect, it seems that everyone here would be running Debian, if it weren't for ideological problems.
(I personally don't care, and lord knows I could bitch alot about RedHat.)
Pre Ordering Online
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I want to know where I can pre order debian 2.1 so i can have it on my doorstep march 4th
Jay
slow connection...????
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I have been incrementally upgrading debian from rex, over the net, over a phone line. It's not a problem. Just point dselect/apt where you want it, go to bed. When you get up, it's done. I regularly do 40M upgrades like this, and have for over 2 years.
It's NOT a problem.
Debian is easy to experiment...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
You know how bad *.0 releases can be. Just look at the difference between 5.0 and 5.2
You must be a novice to even post such a comment
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I am sorry for you. I have used RedHat (5.0 to 5.2) and Debian (1.3 to 2.1). Debian releases are ROCK solid. RedHat 5.1 and 5.2 essentially were bugfixes to the previous versions. Debian 2.0 was the first Debian distribution version to use glibc2 and the tranmission was VERY smooth. I haven't here of anyone having libc problmes on Debian.
www.rpmfind.net
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
An rpm -i/tmp/*.rpm will do that just as well
Just out of curiosity, will that command check dependencies and rpm -i the packages in the right order? If so, then we've got nearly the functionality of dselect; if not, it isn't going to do you much good when *.rpm matches multiple, co-dependent packages. Note that I am not too familiar with the specifics of rpm. Overall, it seems to me that debian's already got an 'rpm': 'dpkg'. Dselect (a menu-driven front end to dpkg) takes it to a whole new level, and gnome-apt far beyond...
Samba puzzle
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I'm been running 2.2.x since it was officially released on my slink box, and just about everything except the stuff on the linked page work. Samba, esp. smbmount, does not. I installed the smbfsx package, replacing the smbfs one, and haven't yet figured out how to get a share to mount. Oh well.
surak@my-dejanews.com
Some people PAY for their phone calls
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Do you realize how much this would cost in most European countries?
Debian, and it's stance
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Capitalist models usually don't collapse, they usually fold into an autocracy. And if you don't believe that the US is one of those, you aren't looking at Washington:) Where the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and the government use both.
Exactly, people need to realize that the reason debian is so good is because of the politics! And btw, debian doesnt stop you from using non-free software anyway.
Uhh please get your facts straight before bitching about things like this. I can install any non-free package just like the free ones. The only difference is debian doesnt distribute non-free things in the official cd image. There is nothing saying vendors cant distribute non-free cds too, which is what http://www.debian-cd.com does.
Those debs are ancient. Try the ones in slink. imlib-nonfree1 no longer exists - it uses libungif, so there is nothing that keeps it from being out of main.:)
Former debian maintainer of Imlib -- Debian GNU/Linux - http://www.debian.org/
dselect + apt is a useful tool. I like it very much, and I'm not the only one. It manages upgrades well for the most part, and it works. The only problem is the huge amount of packages it goes through in one listing, that could be done better, but I can easily see what new/updated packages there are with it...start it up, view the selections and hit 'oo'. -- Debian GNU/Linux - http://www.debian.org/
Debian's politics are practical
by
Omegaman
·
· Score: 1
Debian is 100% volunteer maintained. It makes perfect sense, then, that the "main" distribution is 100% free. Like the linux kernel developers, the hundreds of Debian maintainers do not make money directly off of their efforts. And still it is trivial for users and contributors to install "non-free" packages off of the web site as desired. Much of the non-free distribution can be purchased on cd from vendors such as cheapbytes.
I really don't see where the policy gets in the way. IMHO Debian is the most technically elegant, well intergrated, stable and thoughtfully assembled distro out there. A big thank you to all the Debian volunteers!
To be more specific, the contrib section contains free software (according to the DFSG) that depends on non-free software. For example, LyX is in contrib since it depends on the non-free Xforms library.
What's crappy about their politics? They happen to believe that freedom is more important than convenience. If you would prefer to give up your freedoms in exchange for a little convenience, you're welcome to forego Debian's "crappy politics" and use software that restricts your freedoms.
To the poster who complained that Debian doesn't like anything they must be purchased, I must tell you that I believe you have misunderstood. For a program to be included in Debian, it must be free in the 'freedom' sense, not necessarily gratis. In order to be included in the main distribution, a piece of software must meet the Debian Free Software Guidelines. As a byproduct, most commercial programs connot be included, but that is because the licensing imposes restrictions on the software (including things like royalties), so the software cannot be considered free.
Debian's goals tent toward the idealistic side, much as RMS's do. As such, they make the system as useable as possible, but pick freedom over useability when a choice must be made. When the GNU project was in its younger stages, it can't have been very useful. Nevertheless, people made every ettempt to use it and also worked at improving it. Linux wasn't very useful when it started, but it's gotten a lot better.
The point is that they have a goal toward which they're working: a useable system composed entirely of free software. I think they're almost there. Personally, the only non-free program I use frequently is Netscape, which will be free once Mozilla finishes and I switch over.
--Phil (For the record, I also have Quake, Snes9x, distributed-net, and xanim installed.)
-- 355/113 -- Not the famous irrational number PI, but an incredible simulation!
It's a little more complicated than that. For onr thing, the packages are often created by people other than the authors of the software. In addition, freedom involves more than just whether thay're free to distribute the software. Debian's definition of free software coincides pretty well with the FSF's definition. In order for a program to be considered free by Debian, it must meet the Debian Free Software Guidelines
--Phil (Yes, I'm a little passionate when it comes to free software.)
-- 355/113 -- Not the famous irrational number PI, but an incredible simulation!
Commercial Debian distributions
by
Phil+Gregory
·
· Score: 1
Ah, but people do do this. On Debian's related links page, the first section contains links to distributions based on Debian. I have no idea what any of these distributions do, but they do exist.
--Phil (No other major distros are based on Debian, though.)
-- 355/113 -- Not the famous irrational number PI, but an incredible simulation!
You must be a novice to even post such a comment
by
ninjaz
·
· Score: 1
You just want to _feel_ like you are using something better. I have news for you. Using a less popular distribution of Linux does not mean you are a better Linux user.
Actually, you can objectively measure Debian's stability vs. Redhat's. Take a look at this, for instance, which discusses Redhat's repeated inclusion of buggy libc's. Debian has managed to have stable releases w/ glibc2 in the same timeframe.
I agree that ignorant flaming and posturing is silly, but if you need a stable machine.. like for a web/database server, you have the responsibility of being clueful enough to pick the distro which best suits that need. For me, that's Debian.
If you want the latest, fanciest gadgets, upgrade to the unstable distro. ("potato"). Debian's stable release is for people who are conerned about being as bug-free as possible--not only in terms of programs but in the packaging; most unstability in potato comes from someone uploading packages that were miscompiled, or with broken config scripts, or other weirdness. (I've had to do init=/bin/sh and other interesting things a couple times to get into my system after several really bad packages).
Oh, and potato is updated every day.
Daniel
-- Hurry up and jump on the individualist bandwagon!
Errm, I have a number of non-free programs installed on my system. vrms reports around 20-30 non-free packages. I installed them the same way I install any other package, off the FTP archive. They aren't included on the official CDs but aside from that it's just as easy to install them as anything else.
Daniel
-- Hurry up and jump on the individualist bandwagon!
are giving you trouble by their nature of being in active development, and other umm issues which I assure you have nothing to do with debian. Let's just say that imlib is a very difficult package to make. As for non-free, that might have something to do with using GIF and it's notorious patent, but non-free packages in general are easily installed by including the appropriate line in your/etc/apt/sources.list
The flaw in your argument is that if "this program changes it's format..." then that won't be the one in the stable distribution. You would've had to have downloaded it from the unstable branch, so it's not guaranteed to work straight away. However, even in that circumstance it's entirely likely that the maintainer of that package would change the dependencies to reflect the move, so there's no way to accidentally stuff it up.
So your argument is wrong, but there's a separate argument about how Debian handles source packages. In that case I'd agree, and that's something that the Debian team are working on at the moment (source dependencies were recently added, for example).
"samba 2.0 has been released over a month ago and there is still no dpackage for it."
Err... yes there is.
If you have missed it, Debian has a very nice package search.
Well, you haven't said anything...
by
JoostKooij
·
· Score: 1
Maybe instead you should not say anything yourself if you apparently don't know yourself.
On many occasions have I seen people download.rpm's by hand and running rpm by hand, downloading more.rpm's by hand because there were missing dependencies, again running rpm, again downlading more.rpm's etc. etc.
With Debian, there needs not be such hassle (though you can if you insist.) With dselect or apt-get, all dependencies are checked _in_advance_ .
Everytime I see someone kludge around with.rpm, I ask them, is there no dselect/apt-get available for rpm? Never have I been answered positively.
So, while I'm not admittedly not a RedHat guru, I have worked with it. I have asked others too, so I'm not limiting my scope to my own experiences.
Please take it from me:
No other distribution than Debian has something as good and useful as dselect or apt.
Having said that, apart from the missing dselect/apt-get, RedHat and the other distributions have their own strong points, probably.
Commercial Debian distributions
by
jpick
·
· Score: 1
Debian would make such a nice base compared to Red Hat, yet there are a million RH derivatives out there, and no Debian derivatives (that I am aware of).
Check out LinuxHQ. The following distributions are derived from Debian:
MNIS
PingOO
Eagle Linux m68k
Prosa
Debian-JP
Linux-YeS
DLite
Floppix
Admittedly, there are fewer Debian derived distributions than Red Hat derived distributions - but it would be wrong to say there aren't any.
Samba 2.0 has been in the potato distribution for ages.
Regarding Pine, Debian cannot distribute it in binary form. It is not their politics preventing it, it is U. of Washington's copyright. They prevent the redistribution of any Pine binary that has been built from modified sources. Changes were made to the Pine sources in order to properly integrate it into the Debian distribution (yes, unlike that other big distro, Debian likes it when everything works together). According to the Pine license, Debian can only distribute these changes in source form (in a diff file, for example). So that's what they do.
It would be possible for somebody to build a Pine binary package that would not require changing the sources, I'd imagine. I doubt anybody will bother to do that, though.
The Debian people most definitely do NOT have a grudge against anything non-GPL. One of the most important packages to the Debian distribution, the Perl scripting language, is not licensed under the GPL. There are numerous other standard Debian packages that are not licensed under the GPL.
noah
potato = windfall for desktop
by
Goner
·
· Score: 1
As soon as GNOME 1.0 is out, linux in general will change for the better (or worse depending on your opinion of GUI, etc). But Slink doesn't make me want to uninstall redhat 5.2 w/ 2.2.1, despite my love/hate relationship with rpms.
So upgrade to the unstable branch. I've been running potato since day 1 and things are working fine. Things were far worse while slink was unstable...
The stable branch, is just that, rock solid. Use it if you want constant uptime or a machine you don't want to worry about. Systems like that don't usually use bleeding edge software.
If you want something between "rock solid" and "working today, maybe", consider frozen.
Well, I've been running 2.2.1 for some time on my laptop with no noticeable problems. The only thing that's not so easy to handle is PCMCIA, but that I leave "on hold" until such time as 2.2.2 comes out 8-)
19:17:47$ date; last reboot Mon Feb 22 19:17:53 WET 1999 reboot system boot 2.2.1 Sat Feb 6 16:10 (16+03:07)
ie. >2 weeks uptime. with almost daily apt-get upgrades, running potato (the "next" Debian distribution).
The point of Debian's stable tree is not the latest and greatest the moment it comes out. It is a set of packages that have been tested to work well *TOGETHER*. That takes time to put all the packages together and then work all the kinks out.
For those who want the latest and greatest, ride the unstable tree, that is what it is there for! I installed in the middle of the Hamm freeze. About 2 days later I started riding Slink. I'm currently riding Potato. That is my choice. Meanwhile my laptop, which I use for work, I've only just recently upgraded to slink. You know what? I don't care that it isn't the latest and greatest because IT WORKS.
It is the very choice that makes open source good. We should not be hasty to condemn a project simply because early versions "suck". If you don't like it, don't use it or just fix it. There is always room to have more then one solution to a problem.
Flaming participants of a project because the project "sucks" makes all of us look bad. Instead of the incesant GNOME/KDE wars, Linux/FreeBSD/NetBSD/OpenBSD wars, vi/emacs wars, etc., we should be focusing on make all of the above better products. There are uses for all of them.
Stop the fighting for the sake of open source.
--
Yeah you are right; however, . . .
by
Tas
·
· Score: 1
Flames close peoples minds. Facts open minds. Arguing on technical merit is welcomed. However, I have seen little in the way of argument on merit rather then oppinion on most of the "opposing" open source products.
Since I'm not a KDE/GNOME user for the most part (I've played with GNOME a little), I can't even begin to claim which is "better" then the other for me. I am primarily a console person (made that way due to my current home machine not supporting PS/2 (and thus not supporting my trackballs)).
Debian does not make "political" choices about what packages are included. The criteria is clearly stated in http://www.debian.org/social_contract. The core distribution (main) is intended to remain 100% free. That will not change. There are still a lot of "non-free" programs that get packaged, but the copyright does not conform to the Debian Free Software Guidelines. Some programs like this are put in contrib, some in non-free. Just depends on the exact nature of the license.
And as always, you can easily put together a package for non-free programs yourself.
They are non-free in that they are not redistributable by everyone for everyone. This includes programs that are free for non-commecial use. Everything in main must be free for everyone to use and include redistributable source/binaries. Non-free.debs can also be included on the CDs in some cases, depending on the vendor, but it is up to the vendor to determine if they are allowed to distributed the package.
I did an install of 1.3.1 and upgraded everything into 2.1 packages. I didn't build the kernel on the machine (small drive), but the 2.2.1 package I put together for it with kernel-package worked just fine. Shouldn't be too hard to get working.
--
Well, you haven't said anything...
by
Tas
·
· Score: 1
There is a dpkg-multicd package in the unstable tree now. It may be accepted into slink for the release as well, but I havn't seen for sure. I don't how well it works, since I havn't needed a CD intstall for quite some time now.
--
Commercial Debian distributions
by
Tas
·
· Score: 1
It is likely because the very "freeness" nature of debian makes it less prone to split then TedHat. Just like Linux does not split, I don't see any Debian split in the future either. It could happen, but there is more to be had by helping debian then splitting debian's development force.
You should be able to use samba 2 on hamm without any problem. Just download the package from unstable and install it. There may be other dependancies as well, so either use apt to intall it or just keep downloading...
--
Yeah you are right; however, . . .
by
Tas
·
· Score: 1
'You need to pick yourself up a ps/2 -> serial converter'
Tried that with no success. I am planning to bring another machine with PS/2 online sometime soon.
Definatly agree. Mutt is a very nice mail reader, and its actually small and fast (reading and sorting large mailboxes can sometimes take a while tho..). PGP/GPG support hooks in the code also makes it nice for the security consious people around us.
Even if the "Official" debian system went down, I'm sure you would see the maintainers pull together and continue to maintain the system. And even if you didn't, the source for all of the packaging tools is GPL available:)
I think the problem with pine was something to the extent that you can't modify the source and redistribute it... I think it was done so that there was only the official 'pine' and not pine-clones (pinecones?) floating around... I think it's a rather silly liscense, don't you?
I luv debian, and debian luvs me.
-- I hope to die peacefully in my sleep like grandpa, not screaming like his passengers.
Does there exist somewhere on the net a compiled list of the differences between the projects? Something that would indicate which one is suited to a particular user and/or application? I've seen much in the way of flame, but not much in the way of fact.
Well, if you haven't seen anything...
by
LinOx
·
· Score: 1
If you haven't seen anything in RH because you haven't looked, then why are you posting your uninformed guesses that RH doesn't have anything like apt?
Maybe instead you should ask someone who knows RH and let them post the answer.
Aha! This is why I do the/. thing! Right after I ask a question, I get an answer.
There IS a tool for RH, it's at www.rpmfind.net. And it sounds very useful:
[the following is from the website]
"Basically, rpmfind is a program that will find RPM files on rufus for you.
"For example, rpmfind gimp will tell you what packages are needed to install Gimp on your machine, where to find them, and how much space it will take on your hard drive (so you can also estimate the download time), and can fetch the required files for you.
"Rpmfind can also be used to query the RPM database for existing packages using a keyword or a regular expression."
Sounds cool! So those of us who are using RH can keep using it for a while, yes?
Seems to me it'd be pretty easy to set up a script using rpmfind (with a few temporary environment variables thrown in for fun) to automatically download AND upgrade, if that's really what you want to do.
After reading the information on the site and thinking about it, though, I don't believe I WANT a program to automagically download and upgrade stuff for me. I think I'd rather do a two-step process. Must be from all those years of using MS products (Father, forgive me, for I have FDISK'd).
Now you've got me confused again. Debian doesn't like programs that don't allow "full" redistribution rights, but they put "non-free" s/w on the distro? And what's the deal with pine? It's from the University of Washington!
Debian is a great Dist, the developers are commited, and I love the ease of upgrade... at least until you want to do something that uses something non-free. I am having a hell of a time with enlightenment and friends due to the problems with Imlib vs Imlib-nonfree. If Debian could get around their (IMHO) crappy politics, I think they would wipe all other dists off the map.
www.rpmfind.net Vs. Apt
by
JosefWells
·
· Score: 1
Yes, but try to force apt to overide some dependency that is broken... then we are talking fun.. hours of it.
Slashdot Mirror
I've been holding my breath since the Freeze last Nov. ;)
I know that Debian is well suited for online installs, but to those of us with slow/unreliable modem connections, a 5 hour apt-get is just not practicle, particlularly for those with expensive connections in Europe.
Otherwise, kudos to the Debian developers. I know there recently was some grumbling on the devel list about the freeze taking too long. I sorta felt frustrated about that too, but in the end it's good to get something of top-rate quality.
The down side to freezing something for so long is that Debian has become dated. That's not a good thing to have. Especially since there are so many new things coming out EVERY SINGLE DAY!
A word to Debian, perhaps you need to revise the process. Only worry about criticals in the BASE distribution and mark updated products in BASE as "grave" for the reason of Out of date.
JH
I love comments like these. Really. The more irrelevent to the subject the better. Makes my day.
...to all the other excellent comments,
I'd like to point out that you can still
happily download debs from frozen or unstable
branches of Debian with the expectancy that
they'll work with a minimum of fuss.
I upgraded to PostgreSQL 6.4.2-5 via the above
method. Granted it took more time than with
apt, but it was faster than waiting for potato
to to stable...
I love Debian, too. It's probably the easiest
distro to maintain.
I doubt their political policies will change
anytime soon, however. All of the Debian package
stuff is probably GPL'd, so anyone that wanted
could probably start their own Debian-like
distro without policies that are as restrictive
about non-free stuff as Debian's.
Well, I for one like the fact that Debian does
distinguish itself this clearly with the political
aspect of the software. One of the primary goals
is to have a completely free core distribution.
AFAIK they are the only ones to take this into
account in such a clear manner. You want less
politics? Choose one of the many others available.
Thats the beauty of choice.
What's the big deal? You can download all the non-free packages (that don't cost money, of course), from www.debian.org. They just don't include them on the CD.
Yummi!, Already running slink and loving it. And now I can install slink on sparcs and Alphas ...
Go Debian! Debian is the right way to go. The ONLY Linux distribution that is mantained by a group of volunteers just like linux kernel is. Consequenly Debian is not a sellout like Red... Debian folks care more about substance, functionality and stability instead of flash and fast releases. If you are already familiar with unix or linux or not very lazy you should give it a try.
Don't use KDE, unless you are a queer monkey.
Use RedHat. Debian was founded (iirc) for the freedom which you despise.
BTW - It is very easy to use non-free apps in Debian I have a few installed myself.
Debian freezes take a _while_. But the stable releases are rock solid. You are more likely to find bugs and other annoyances in a RedHat stable release than in Debian stable release. I speak from my experience
Has it occurred to you that the reason Debian is great is that the developers are committed and the reason they are committed is because of the "crappy" politics?
Go here.
Also check Ttis page on the debian site...
Umm..
Rpmfind (www.rpmfind.net) does an apt-get like thing rather well.
\
JH
How difficult will it be to get the 2.2 kernel working on this? Will some of the packages have to be updated?
so does anyone know when the 6.0 version of redhat will be out?
This is exactly what they want. They want a programmer to think "Man, this system is great. If only it came with a web browser [or whatever]". Then that programmer is much more likely to contribute time to creating a web browser that CAN be included.
The Debian method is infective just like the GPL is.
BTW, I use RedHat mostly because when I knew nothing that's what I stumbled across. But I'm getting interested in tryin Debian. Maybe I'll put it on my next computer.
I've been running 2.2 on slink since its .pre days. I just downloaded the tarball and compiled
it. (I know it's not debian's way but it works for me)
I am running Debian on my system and I'm pleased with it, but I noticed that it has several problems.
The packages it ships with are outdated. For example, samba 2.0 has been released over a month ago and there is still no dpackage for it. This defeates the whole purpose of Debian's famous ease of upgrade. Oh, does 2.1 ship with samba 1.9.8p10, the same as 2.0?
I too am really annoyed with Debain zealots who have a grudge against anything non-GPL. Debian doesn't even ship with pine! Give me a break, people. (I know there is a source package for it but it's outdated and I haven't been able to compile it).
I've been using redhat for a while but stopped using it after I got debian, I think redhat is good for beginner, It's something to use the six first months that you have linux, then you should upgrade to debian.
You're too stupid to figure out how to unleash it's power
I'm running 2.2.1 on slink and didn't have to update any packages :)
Sorry, I didn't find samba 2.0 under hamm or slink and I assumed it's not packaged yet. But can I install it on hamm?
/. poll about it).
But regarding pine, could you at least compile it and distribute the binary in the non-free section? After all, it's the most commonly used mail reader in the Linux (and Unix) community (I remember there was a
Although 2.2 will work out-of-the-box on Slink, things like /sbin/ifconfig will show incorrect information about dropped packets etc. Grab the netbase package from potato and install it, and you'll be fine :-)
Regards,
Gnuspice.
How was the Redhat linuxconf and control panel
broken?
Broke dependencies are not common on debian systems unlike on redhat (They freaking broke every day on RH 5.1)
But if you really need to force something use
dpkg --ignore-depends=
see dpkg --help for other options
Just make sure non-free, contrib, and non-US are enabled in /etc/apt/sources.list For example:
# Use for a local mirror - remove the ftp1 http lines for the bits
# your mirror contains.
# deb file:/your/mirror/here/debian stable main contrib non-free
# See sources.list(5) for more information, especial
# Remember that you can only use http, ftp or file URIs
deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free
deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable non-US
Look, I've used Linux for years. I can use
Slackware, TurboLinux, Redhat, Caldera, or Debian
Why? Because I know how to use Linux. I am
currently using RedHat. Yes, it has a lot of
GUI tools for beginners. I don't use them
however. I use RedHat because it usually has the
newest stuff and with the exception of 5.0...
it has been stable. One broken version of glibc
shouldn't make you hate a distribution for forever.
You just want to _feel_ like you are using
something better. I have news for you. Using
a less popular distribution of Linux does not
mean you are a better Linux user.
Get over your "My dog can run faster than your
dog" attitude.
Shesh
RPMFIND does automatically get the dependant rpm's if they are not on your system. The ONLY difference between rpmfind and apt is that apt'll get and install them too.
/tmp/*.rpm will do that just as well.
Note, I'm not TRASHING debian.. but the argument that apt can install them after downloading is kinda fickle. An rpm -i
JH
I agree completely.
I use Red Hat, because I know how to. I haven't got the energy to spend learning how to fix all the "quirks" in a new distribution, and I always fiddle round with and upgrade so much stuff that it doesn't really matter to me if there are a few problems with what I started with.
And most people I know who use Debian seem to think they're l33t for doing so... now that Linux is becoming more mainstream, it's fashionable to slag off Red Hat. When Debian becomes really popular, all these "GO DEBIAN RED HAT SUX" posters will probably move on to BSD...
>And you must be a newbie to post such a comment. >Anyone who has used linux for any decent amount >of time will realize Debian is the obvious >choice.
You must like to pick on people...
>At least I can stand behind my posts, something >you cant say for yourself
Gimme yer address and than let's see who stands behind their posts
twit
Concepts are sometimes associated with the wrong words. It is not
accurate to say "convenience" is different from "freedom". The only
reason I choose free software is for practical convenience: I don't wish
to be fettered by closed standards, non-free libraries, or restrictive
software. If freedom was not convenient, I would rather not have it;
makes no sense to have freedom just for the sake of having it.
Two clear-cut possibilities. Either freedom is always convenient, or always
it is not. You cannot say, at some times freedom is convenient, and in
other times it is not convenient; think about it, twist it all-you want, and
you can see the fallacy of the middle-of-the-road solution. If you find proprietary more convenient, go with proprietary. No problem.
Debian is not just a distribution, Debian is the peoples's distribution,
What is Linux to Unix, Debian is to Linux. Do you want to influence
decisions that affect your operating system? Become a Debian developer,
and you are allowed to present technical arguments on all aspects pertaining
to the distribution.
Most distributions (if not all) do not allow its users such privileges.
Debian is different.
Debian is a great distribution with some minor flaws. This can be said about ANY distribution. What I find amazing is that it's working. Now.. be careful, don't react quickly, because what I'm about to say may inflame some of you.
The entire GNU project is based on socialist beliefs. Debian, too, is based on a socialistic model. Now, this isn't bad, but history shows that socialist models do one of two things. One is become corrupt. Two is to collapse under it's own weight with beuracracy. There is ALWAYS the chance that it'd work, it's breaking one rule of the previous mentioned downfalls.
Debian keeps information free and flowing. This is a strong way to keep the system from going corrupt. If everyone knows the stance, the system as a whole takes on a persona/feeling of it's own. Debian , in that manner, best reflects the ideals and goals of the Linux community. For that, it's to be commended. The other way a socialist project fails is to collapse under it's own weight making sure everyone gets a say. This way is much more scary. Debian's bug tracking and release system, although phenomenal, are getting quite heavy. If Debian were to fail, this would be the method it fails.
All in all, I think I'm going to go back to Debian. I'll make my little changes and go on with my life. If ANY THING has made Linux suceed this long, it's been the esscence of freedom surrounding the intracices. Debian, better than any other distribution out there, exemplifies this process.
Jarrod H
(CheapBytes is being slow)
I'm curious, does anyone have anything bad to say about Debian, that's not related to their politics? Other than vauge moaning about dselect, it seems that everyone here would be running Debian, if it weren't for ideological problems.
(I personally don't care, and lord knows I could bitch alot about RedHat.)
I want to know where I can pre order debian 2.1 so i can have it on my doorstep march 4th
Jay
I have been incrementally upgrading debian from rex, over the net, over a phone line. It's not a problem. Just point dselect/apt where you want it, go to bed. When you get up, it's done. I regularly do 40M upgrades like this, and have for over 2 years.
It's NOT a problem.
apt-get install communicator-smotif-45 netscape-java-45
You know how bad *.0 releases can be. Just look at the difference between 5.0 and 5.2
I am sorry for you. I have used RedHat (5.0 to 5.2) and Debian (1.3 to 2.1). Debian releases are ROCK solid. RedHat 5.1 and 5.2 essentially were bugfixes to the previous versions. Debian 2.0 was the first Debian distribution version to use glibc2 and the tranmission was VERY smooth. I haven't here of anyone having libc problmes on Debian.
Just out of curiosity, will that command check dependencies and rpm -i the packages in the right order? If so, then we've got nearly the functionality of dselect; if not, it isn't going to do you much good when *.rpm matches multiple, co-dependent packages. Note that I am not too familiar with the specifics of rpm. Overall, it seems to me that debian's already got an 'rpm': 'dpkg'. Dselect (a menu-driven front end to dpkg) takes it to a whole new level, and gnome-apt far beyond...
I'm been running 2.2.x since it was officially released on my slink box, and just about everything except the stuff on the linked page work. Samba, esp. smbmount, does not. I installed the smbfsx package, replacing the smbfs one, and haven't yet figured out how to get a share to mount. Oh well.
surak@my-dejanews.com
Do you realize how much this would cost in most European countries?
Capitalist models usually don't collapse, they usually fold into an autocracy. And if you don't believe that the US is one of those, you aren't looking at Washington :) Where the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and the government use both.
Jarrod H
Exactly, people need to realize that the reason debian is so good is because of the politics! And btw, debian doesnt stop you from using non-free software anyway.
Uhh please get your facts straight before bitching about things like this. I can install any non-free package just like the free ones. The only difference is debian doesnt distribute non-free things in the official cd image. There is nothing saying vendors cant distribute non-free cds too, which is what http://www.debian-cd.com does.
samba 2.0.2 is in potato
Those debs are ancient. Try the ones in slink. imlib-nonfree1 no longer exists - it uses libungif, so there is nothing that keeps it from being out of main. :)
Former debian maintainer of Imlib
--
Debian GNU/Linux - http://www.debian.org/
dselect + apt is a useful tool. I like it very much, and I'm not the only one. It manages upgrades well for the most part, and it works. The only problem is the huge amount of packages it goes through in one listing, that could be done better, but I can easily see what new/updated packages there are with it...start it up, view the selections and hit 'oo'.
--
Debian GNU/Linux - http://www.debian.org/
Posted by DonR:
Has a nice ring to it, don't ya think?
Debian is 100% volunteer maintained. It makes perfect sense, then, that the "main" distribution is 100% free. Like the linux kernel developers, the hundreds of Debian maintainers do not make money directly off of their efforts. And still it is trivial for users and contributors to install "non-free" packages off of the web site as desired. Much of the non-free distribution can be purchased on cd from vendors such as cheapbytes.
I really don't see where the policy gets in the way. IMHO Debian is the most technically elegant, well intergrated, stable and thoughtfully assembled distro out there. A big thank you to all the Debian volunteers!
Isn't that the same day that GNOME 1.0 is supposed to be released on?
Please alter my pants as fashion dictates.
To be more specific, the contrib section contains free software (according to the DFSG) that depends on non-free software. For example, LyX is in contrib since it depends on the non-free Xforms library.
Please alter my pants as fashion dictates.
What's crappy about their politics? They happen to believe that freedom is more important than convenience. If you would prefer to give up your freedoms in exchange for a little convenience, you're welcome to forego Debian's "crappy politics" and use software that restricts your freedoms.
To the poster who complained that Debian doesn't like anything they must be purchased, I must tell you that I believe you have misunderstood. For a program to be included in Debian, it must be free in the 'freedom' sense, not necessarily gratis. In order to be included in the main distribution, a piece of software must meet the Debian Free Software Guidelines. As a byproduct, most commercial programs connot be included, but that is because the licensing imposes restrictions on the software (including things like royalties), so the software cannot be considered free.
--Phil (For more on free software, read The GNU Project.)
355/113 -- Not the famous irrational number PI, but an incredible simulation!
Debian's goals tent toward the idealistic side, much as RMS's do. As such, they make the system as useable as possible, but pick freedom over useability when a choice must be made. When the GNU project was in its younger stages, it can't have been very useful. Nevertheless, people made every ettempt to use it and also worked at improving it. Linux wasn't very useful when it started, but it's gotten a lot better.
The point is that they have a goal toward which they're working: a useable system composed entirely of free software. I think they're almost there. Personally, the only non-free program I use frequently is Netscape, which will be free once Mozilla finishes and I switch over.
--Phil (For the record, I also have Quake, Snes9x, distributed-net, and xanim installed.)
355/113 -- Not the famous irrational number PI, but an incredible simulation!
It's a little more complicated than that. For onr thing, the packages are often created by people other than the authors of the software. In addition, freedom involves more than just whether thay're free to distribute the software. Debian's definition of free software coincides pretty well with the FSF's definition. In order for a program to be considered free by Debian, it must meet the Debian Free Software Guidelines
--Phil (Yes, I'm a little passionate when it comes to free software.)
355/113 -- Not the famous irrational number PI, but an incredible simulation!
Ah, but people do do this. On Debian's related links page, the first section contains links to distributions based on Debian. I have no idea what any of these distributions do, but they do exist.
--Phil (No other major distros are based on Debian, though.)
355/113 -- Not the famous irrational number PI, but an incredible simulation!
Actually, you can objectively measure Debian's stability vs. Redhat's. Take a look at this, for instance, which discusses Redhat's repeated inclusion of buggy libc's. Debian has managed to have stable releases w/ glibc2 in the same timeframe.
I agree that ignorant flaming and posturing is silly, but if you need a stable machine.. like for a web/database server, you have the responsibility of being clueful enough to pick the distro which best suits that need. For me, that's Debian.
It got nothing to do with cost. We are talking free not gratis.
/mill
If you want the latest, fanciest gadgets, upgrade to the unstable distro. ("potato"). Debian's stable release is for people who are conerned about being as bug-free as possible--not only in terms of programs but in the packaging; most unstability in potato comes from someone uploading packages that were miscompiled, or with broken config scripts, or other weirdness. (I've had to do init=/bin/sh and other interesting things a couple times to get into my system after several really bad packages).
Oh, and potato is updated every day.
Daniel
Hurry up and jump on the individualist bandwagon!
Errm, I have a number of non-free programs installed on my system. vrms reports around 20-30 non-free packages. I installed them the same way I install any other package, off the FTP archive. They aren't included on the official CDs but aside from that it's just as easy to install them as anything else.
Daniel
Hurry up and jump on the individualist bandwagon!
are giving you trouble by their nature of being /etc/apt/sources.list
in active development, and other umm issues which
I assure you have nothing to do with debian. Let's
just say that imlib is a very difficult package to
make. As for non-free, that might have something
to do with using GIF and it's notorious patent,
but non-free packages in general are easily
installed by including the appropriate line in
your
The flaw in your argument is that if "this program changes it's format..." then that won't be the one in the stable distribution. You would've had to have downloaded it from the unstable branch, so it's not guaranteed to work straight away. However, even in that circumstance it's entirely likely that the maintainer of that package would change the dependencies to reflect the move, so there's no way to accidentally stuff it up.
So your argument is wrong, but there's a separate argument about how Debian handles source packages. In that case I'd agree, and that's something that the Debian team are working on at the moment (source dependencies were recently added, for example).
"samba 2.0 has been released over a month ago and there is still no dpackage for it."
Err... yes there is.
If you have missed it, Debian has a very nice package search.
Maybe instead you should not say anything yourself if you apparently don't know yourself.
.rpm's by hand and running rpm by hand, downloading more .rpm's by hand because there were missing dependencies, again running rpm, again downlading more .rpm's etc. etc.
.rpm, I ask them, is there no dselect/apt-get available for rpm? Never have I been answered positively.
On many occasions have I seen people download
With Debian, there needs not be such hassle (though you can if you insist.) With dselect or apt-get, all dependencies are checked _in_advance_ .
Everytime I see someone kludge around with
So, while I'm not admittedly not a RedHat guru, I have worked with it. I have asked others too, so I'm not limiting my scope to my own experiences.
Please take it from me:
No other distribution than Debian has something as good and useful as dselect or apt.
Having said that, apart from the missing dselect/apt-get, RedHat and the other distributions have their own strong points, probably.
Check out LinuxHQ. The following distributions are derived from Debian:
- MNIS
- PingOO
- Eagle Linux m68k
- Prosa
- Debian-JP
- Linux-YeS
- DLite
- Floppix
Admittedly, there are fewer Debian derived distributions than Red Hat derived distributions - but it would be wrong to say there aren't any.Cheers,
- Jim
Samba 2.0 has been in the potato distribution for ages.
Regarding Pine, Debian cannot distribute it in binary form. It is not their politics preventing it, it is U. of Washington's copyright. They prevent the redistribution of any Pine binary that has been built from modified sources. Changes were made to the Pine sources in order to properly integrate it into the Debian distribution (yes, unlike that other big distro, Debian likes it when everything works together). According to the Pine license, Debian can only distribute these changes in source form (in a diff file, for example). So that's what they do.
It would be possible for somebody to build a Pine binary package that would not require changing the sources, I'd imagine. I doubt anybody will bother to do that, though.
The Debian people most definitely do NOT have a grudge against anything non-GPL. One of the most important packages to the Debian distribution, the Perl scripting language, is not licensed under the GPL. There are numerous other standard Debian packages that are not licensed under the GPL.
noah
As soon as GNOME 1.0 is out, linux in general will change for the better (or worse depending on your opinion of GUI, etc). But Slink doesn't make me want to uninstall redhat 5.2 w/ 2.2.1, despite my love/hate relationship with rpms.
So bored, that I had to post.
So upgrade to the unstable branch. I've been running potato since day 1 and things are working fine. Things were far worse while slink was unstable...
The stable branch, is just that, rock solid. Use it if you want constant uptime or a machine you don't want to worry about. Systems like that don't usually use bleeding edge software.
If you want something between "rock solid" and "working today, maybe", consider frozen.
Well, I've been running 2.2.1 for some time on my laptop with no noticeable problems. The only thing that's not so easy to handle is PCMCIA, but that I leave "on hold" until such time as 2.2.2 comes out 8-)
19:17:47$ date; last reboot
Mon Feb 22 19:17:53 WET 1999
reboot system boot 2.2.1 Sat Feb 6 16:10 (16+03:07)
ie. >2 weeks uptime. with almost daily apt-get upgrades, running potato (the "next" Debian distribution).
I think this is way too late. If I were in charge, I would skip slink and go straight to potato.
You never have to do 'dpkg -i' multiple times.
If you have tried to install a .deb and it complains about a missing dependency, all you have to do is installed the missing package, then do a
The original package has already been installed, it just has to be configured.
I used to use pine for a while, and I quite liked the program.
I now use GNUS which is very nicely packaged under Debian. The only thing that I think could be improved in GNUS is the funny MIME handling.
The point of Debian's stable tree is not the latest and greatest the moment it comes out. It is a set of packages that have been tested to work well *TOGETHER*. That takes time to put all the packages together and then work all the kinks out.
For those who want the latest and greatest, ride the unstable tree, that is what it is there for!
I installed in the middle of the Hamm freeze. About 2 days later I started riding Slink. I'm currently riding Potato. That is my choice. Meanwhile my laptop, which I use for work, I've only just recently upgraded to slink. You know what? I don't care that it isn't the latest and greatest because IT WORKS.
C'Mon people, this isn't rocket science!
-- Grey d'Miyu, not just another pretty color.
It is the very choice that makes open source good. We should not be hasty to condemn a project simply because early versions "suck". If you don't like it, don't use it or just fix it. There is always room to have more then one solution to a problem.
Flaming participants of a project because the project "sucks" makes all of us look bad. Instead of the incesant GNOME/KDE wars, Linux/FreeBSD/NetBSD/OpenBSD wars, vi/emacs wars, etc., we should be focusing on make all of the above better products. There are uses for all of them.
Stop the fighting for the sake of open source.
--
Flames close peoples minds. Facts open minds. Arguing on technical merit is welcomed. However, I have seen little in the way of argument on merit rather then oppinion on most of the "opposing" open source products.
Since I'm not a KDE/GNOME user for the most part (I've played with GNOME a little), I can't even begin to claim which is "better" then the other for me. I am primarily a console person (made that way due to my current home machine not supporting PS/2 (and thus not supporting my trackballs)).
--
Debian does not make "political" choices about what packages are included. The criteria is clearly stated in http://www.debian.org/social_contract. The core distribution (main) is intended to remain 100% free. That will not change. There are still a lot of "non-free" programs that get packaged, but the copyright does not conform to the Debian Free Software Guidelines. Some programs like this are put in contrib, some in non-free. Just depends on the exact nature of the license.
And as always, you can easily put together a package for non-free programs yourself.
--
They are non-free in that they are not redistributable by everyone for everyone. This includes programs that are free for non-commecial use. Everything in main must be free for everyone to use and include redistributable source/binaries. Non-free .debs can also be included on the CDs in some cases, depending on the vendor, but it is up to the vendor to determine if they are allowed to distributed the package.
--
I did an install of 1.3.1 and upgraded everything into 2.1 packages. I didn't build the kernel on the machine (small drive), but the 2.2.1 package I put together for it with kernel-package worked just fine. Shouldn't be too hard to get working.
--
There is a dpkg-multicd package in the unstable tree now. It may be accepted into slink for the release as well, but I havn't seen for sure. I don't how well it works, since I havn't needed a CD intstall for quite some time now.
--
It is likely because the very "freeness" nature of debian makes it less prone to split then TedHat. Just like Linux does not split, I don't see any Debian split in the future either. It could happen, but there is more to be had by helping debian then splitting debian's development force.
--
You should be able to use samba 2 on hamm without any problem. Just download the package from unstable and install it. There may be other dependancies as well, so either use apt to intall it or just keep downloading...
--
'You need to pick yourself up a ps/2 -> serial converter'
Tried that with no success. I am planning to bring another machine with PS/2 online sometime soon.
gpm is nice, but not a neccesity...
--
Definatly agree. Mutt is a very nice mail reader, and its actually small and fast (reading and sorting large mailboxes can sometimes take a while tho..). PGP/GPG support hooks in the code also makes it nice for the security consious people around us.
--
Even if the "Official" debian system went down, I'm sure you would see the maintainers pull together and continue to maintain the system. And even if you didn't, the source for all of the packaging tools is GPL available :)
--
I think the problem with pine was something to the extent that you can't modify the source and redistribute it... I think it was done so that there was only the official 'pine' and not pine-clones (pinecones?) floating around... I think it's a rather silly liscense, don't you?
I luv debian, and debian luvs me.
I hope to die peacefully in my sleep like grandpa, not screaming like his passengers.
Yeah and so does Micro$lop Windoze ;->
Gnome rocks!
Regarding the choices...
Does there exist somewhere on the net a compiled list of the differences between the projects? Something that would indicate which one is suited to a particular user and/or application? I've seen much in the way of flame, but not much in the way of fact.
If you haven't seen anything in RH because you haven't looked, then why are you posting your uninformed guesses that RH doesn't have anything like apt?
Maybe instead you should ask someone who knows RH and let them post the answer.
Aha! This is why I do the /. thing! Right after I ask a question, I get an answer.
There IS a tool for RH, it's at www.rpmfind.net. And it sounds very useful:
[the following is from the website]
"Basically, rpmfind is a program that will find RPM files on rufus for you.
"For example, rpmfind gimp will tell you what packages are needed to install Gimp on your machine, where to find them, and how much space it will take on your hard drive (so you can also estimate the download time), and can fetch the required files for you.
"Rpmfind can also be used to query the RPM database for existing packages using a keyword or a regular expression."
Sounds cool! So those of us who are using RH can keep using it for a while, yes?
Seems to me it'd be pretty easy to set up a script using rpmfind (with a few temporary environment variables thrown in for fun) to automatically download AND upgrade, if that's really what you want to do.
After reading the information on the site and thinking about it, though, I don't believe I WANT a program to automagically download and upgrade stuff for me. I think I'd rather do a two-step process. Must be from all those years of using MS products (Father, forgive me, for I have FDISK'd).
Now you've got me confused again. Debian doesn't like programs that don't allow "full" redistribution rights, but they put "non-free" s/w on the distro? And what's the deal with pine? It's from the University of Washington!
Rats. That's disappointing. The reputation of the UW has been stained in my mind. Well, guess I'll move on to [insert free mail prg here].
Debian is a great Dist, the developers are commited, and I love the ease of upgrade... at least until you want to do something that uses something non-free. I am having a hell of a time with enlightenment and friends due to the problems with Imlib vs Imlib-nonfree. If Debian could get around their (IMHO) crappy politics, I think they would wipe all other dists off the map.
Yes, but try to force apt to overide some dependency that is broken... then we are talking fun.. hours of it.
Tell me I am making some stupid mistake.
Are they killing that atrocity soon? I like debian, but I REAAAAALLY don't like dselect.