$ urpmf --summary grass libgrass5_0:Standalone GRASS Database Access Library libgrass5_0-devel:Standalone GRASS Database Access Library grass:Geographic Resources Analysis Support System libgrass5_0-static-devel:Standalone GRASS Database Access Library grass54:Geographic Resources Analysis Support System spearfish-grass:Grass support for the Spearfish sample GIS data set
(BTW, that "grass" is grass-6.0.0: $ urpmq -r grass grass-6.0.0-2mdk )
If you're configuring 5000 machines, and not using the tools available to do customisations like this (autoyast on SuSE, kickstart on RH, Drakx auto-installation on Mandrake), then you're wasting your time.
If you think one AD box will handle 1000 clients, think again - OpenLDAP scales better, you need to tune it some though.
Many users will post about distributions most of us consider to be "closed" and that they have these features, but Mandrake has supported authentication to Windows domains since 9.1 (for NT4 domains) and 10.0 (for AD domains).
I couldn't choose what to install, and later found out it didn't include gcc. I installed that only to find it couldn't successfully compile anything!
The only version of Mandrake that doesn't include compilers is the Discovery Edition, which is not avialable for download. But, even on Discovery, you can use online urpmi repositories to install any software you like.
Since this seems to be your main argument, the rest of your post is really invalid.
Just like about every other distro which has an option to not install all the kitchen sinks...
(of course, you left out the libraries that bash requires, like glibc, ncurses or termcap, and I'm guessing you needed at least some tool which is capable of retrieving files from the internet, so you probably needed at least something like wget or curl).
The only difference is what you type before the package name (ie s/pacman/urpmi/g, or s/pacman/yum install/g, s/pacman/apt-get install/g).
Mandrake has had Windows Domain (ie NT4) support during installation since Mandrake 9.1. It supported AD in some AD configurations (ie "Allow anonymous searches in AD" or something like that).
Full AD support is available in 10.1 and Corporate Desktop 3.
Oh, geez, does no one understand the difference between a symbolic mathematics package (like Mathematica, Maple, or Calculation Center) and a numerical mathematics package (like Octave and Matlab)?
There might not be such a great difference in functionality between Mathematic/Maple and Matlab, if you have the symbolic math toolbox (although the UI is totally different...).
Of course, I don't think Octave has a symbolic math toolbox or equivalent at present...
The link above is to boot-floppy-rh9.tar.gz, this file contains boot-floppy-rh9-2.4.20-6.img, boot-floppy-rh9-2.4.20.8.img and README. Inside of the img files is six *.msg files, initrd.img, serverworks.patch, splash.lss, syslinux.cfg and vmlinuz files. Inside of the initrd.img files is four files related to kernel modules, two sbin files (one derived from busybox) and 12 etc config files. There are two GPL works used, the kernel and busybox--but none of the files provide the complete text of the GPL and none of the files provide any offer for the complete source code.
Let's remember that this is an updated boot disk for an existing GPL operating system, which fulfils all the requirements of the GPL.
Dell is not distributing the boot disk commercially (although they may have distributed the original GPL operating system commercially in compliance with the GPL).
As such, you should consider RedHat 9 + the boot disk as the entire commercially distributed work, and not the boot disk on it's own.
Since Dell provides the patch (serverworks.patch you reference above), in conjunction with the original kernel-source package for RH9, you have the complete source code for the kernel provided. If RH didn't provide the source code for busybox... well, that's more RH's issue than Dell's.
Now, you seem to be wanting Dell to support some other distribution than the one for which the requirements (RH9 plus boot disk) of the GPL are valid... unless I misunderstand your motivations for this.
I don't see any clause in the GPL which states that who is employed or what is contributed changes the conditions for redistribution. Could you please directly quote the section of the GPL which is relevent to your statement?
Please reply in context. You accused Dell of being a bad member of the community... my reply in the paragraph you quote was only in the community context, not the GPL context.
Could you explain exactly how they are violating the GPL by providing a boot floppy with updated versions of the GPL drivers that are available in the later RH kernels (as I understand, this is your issue)?
Since Dell currently employs developers who work on open-source drivers for a number of SCSI cards, and has contributed a number of other pieces of software, I don't see that you should criticising their involvement in the community...
So, please provide us with a more detailed description of this supposed GPL violation, or I'll write you off as a troll.
So, you're saying Unix doesn't cater for secretaries? Unfortunately, we have secretaries. We don't want them all to have to use Windows, but from what you're saying I guess we should use AD and Windows only?
Since they use awk and grep all the time, please do not suggest some setup with a few dozen icons to launch programs on different machines
You're the one proposing solutions. But, many organisations need to cater to users who would be totally lost running awk.
If you need the MS specific features
I don't need features that are only feasible on MS products. I want to have more automated software management, easier tools to set default settings for groups of users (and not just initially). Take the example of going from not using a proxy server to using one (and not doing a transparent proxy server because you want authentication too). You can deploy the settings with AD... you can't deploy the settings easily on Unix, even if you deploy scripts that set http_proxy etc.
sort of like the difference between using email and MS Exchange
Well, we would like enterprise calendaring, but we don't want Exchange either.
Name one really usefull thing that you can do with Active Directory that you can't do with a well set up LDAP
-push software updates to all clients (ok, so you could script this... but it works out-the-box on AD) -deploy user settings (ie the proxy example above) -manage the rights users have on their workstations (ok, since sudo 1.6.8 it's easier since we can now deploy our sudo rules in LDAP... but it doesn't really work out-the-box yet although Mandrake 10.1 almost has it) -management of SSL certificates -disconnected authentication (so your laptop users can also use LDAP). This is almost working with pam_ccreds and nss_updatedb, but there are still 3 isues).
Show me the typical Unix admin who can set up a full LDAP and Kerberos implementation with sudo rules etc. and some means of configuration management and software maintenance in one day... and for each one of them I will show you 100 MCSEs who can do that and more with Windows.
The fact remains, it is still a lot more effort to get even the basic single sign-on featuresof LDAPv3 running on Unix than it is to get all the AD features working sufficiently on Windows 2000.
I have users that work on a dozen hosts daily, and they only have to enter their password once - keys handle the rest. "ssh hostname" and they are in as the same user they logged into on the local machine.
Oh, then I guess I should be using that. Oh wait, I am... (and happen to maintain keychain - among other packages - in a popular linux distribution, which makes using passphrase-encrypted keys much more convenient). I hope you're not using passphrase-less keys...
But, I hope you're not suggesting users should ssh in to the mail server to read their mail, ssh in to the proxy server to use the internet, or ssh to the authentication server as root to add/remove/modify user accounts.
MS didn't invent Kerberos or LDAP
That's right, but I didn't say that. MIT invented one, UoM the other. I am sure you knew that though.
(Active Directory is a subet of this)
Misconception. AD is a lot more than LDAP and Kerberos... (and so, BTW, is NDS/eDirectory).
, it was available on all breeds of *nix before they used it - just a pain to set up.
Assuming you mean LDAP + Kerberos (and not AD), that was my point. Seems you missed it. We're not there yet, because it is a lot more pain to get *all* the same features as AD provides out-the-box working on *any* Unix (except maybe OS X... but I am not sure).
If little knocked up in a weekend application B that only compiles on linux can't work with it you use something that can.
Well, then tell my why there is only one GUI Unix mail client that supports GSS-API authentication (I am not sure how many of the console-based ones support GSS-API, but I suspect it's also only 1), no browsers that support GSS-API authentication to proxy servers, no open-source proxy server that supports GSS-API authentication (but the most popular one supports NTLM) and why Samba only recently (3.0.6) got sufficient Kerberos support to even contemplate adding support for some of the basic features in Windows 2000.
Sorry, but, we're not there yet. Anyone who thinks we are either doesn't know where "there" is, or doesn't know where we are.
OpenLDAP + Heimdal + nss_ldap + pam_krb5 + NFSv4 gets us a lot closer than NIS+NFS (for a Unix-only solution with similar features), but still not close enough.
Don't get me wrong, I deploy Free Software solutions, but they're still not as good as they should be to compete. I'm doing my bit... but there's a lot of work to do. For example, there is currently no equivalent to Group Policy Objects...
NIS+NFS more secure than Kerberised everything and well-secured LDAP implementation using signed and encryped CIFS?
Sorry, there's no way.
Now, maybe it's more resistant to spyware and virii, but it's not more secure.
Just run: $ ypcat passwd|jack to find out how insecure you are!
If you were running Kerberos, OpenLDAP and NFSv4.... maybe, if your setup was good and your ACLs on your OpenLDAP server were reasonable, it might be more secure.
Yeah, so I've been doing winbind (without Kerberos) on Mandrake since samba-2.2.2, and Mandrake 10.1 or 10.0 Corporate will setup auth to ADS (ie with Kerberos) during install or using drakauth, but that's still not single sign-on.
Single sign-on means you enter your password once per session, not that you enter the same password 15 times during the day.
In other words, it's the full Kerberos thing, including support for Kerberos auth in all the preferable mail clients, web browsers, network browsers (not just smbclient -k), FTP clients, IM clients etc etc.
So, we have 3 file integrity verification files (KEY, MD5SUMS, SHA1SUMS), a Windows binary installer and it's signature, a linux GTK2 binary and it's signature, a Mac binary and it's signature, and a Windows binary in a zip file and it's signature, and 3 directories which can either not be entered or have nothing in them.
I'm looking for the equivalent of: ftp://ftp26moz.newaol.com/pub/mozilla.org/thu nderb ird/releases/0.8/thunderbird-source-0.8.tar.bz2
If other packages can be build on Mandrake, Fedora, then fine -- but I don't think that they will remain free in the broadest sense of the words
You still haven't described that "unique" attribute. I am quite sure in the beginning Debian was not specifically designed as the basis for other distributions. It became necessary for people to make other distributions because Debian moves too slowly. Other distros might not need to be forked (for instance, Mandrake has two different types of Live CDs, both kept in sync with the main distribution).
Now, why can't we have the same thing for hard drive access? So, I download fungame.exe, and when I go to run it, my "firewall" tells me fungame.exe is trying to write to fifteen different directories to install different spyware products.
Don't run software as root.
Oh, you're using Windows. Try using an account with non-Administrative priveleges and see if you can get by with runas.exe to run installers, and ensure that %WINDIR% and anything in your path is not writeable by your normal user account.
Re:Concise guide to Linux on the deskop for non-te
on
Linux Desktop Guide
·
· Score: 1
Install drivers from Manufacturers CD.
Actually, it's: Install 3 driver CDs from the Manufacturer, and wait 2 hours for them to install (this is after wiating 2 hours for XP itself to install).
Try and find a manufacturer's CD with all your Linux drivers in one place, or for that matter a manufacturer with official support for Linux.
You may have noticed that I only needed one additional driver, since at the time Mandrake 10.0 shipped, this driver did not exist. It will be in 10.1, and then, installation of linux on this model will be possible in 15 with all hardware working and all necessary software installed, vs 4 hours to get XP installed with no useful software.
How is this an argument that Linux is better exactly?
You were the one arguing Linux wasn't ready for the desktop, now it seems you're trying to defend XP...
Re:Concise guide to Linux on the deskop for non-te
on
Linux Desktop Guide
·
· Score: 1
What'll kick butt is when the iw2200 driver gets finished.
I wrote: To get the remaining hardware working under linux I had to download a driver for the wireless card and adjust the screen resolution.
I used ipw2200-0.4, which now does work, and it's will be in at least 1 kernel for Mandrake 10.1 (hopefully the default too).
(no, it's not as easy as putting in a newer MDK CD, that actually broke the system).
I have upgraded a number of machines via the 'urpmi --auto-select' method with very few problems.
Anyway, I didn't see your bug reports...
And we are getting ready now because 9.0 will soon be discontinued as well (or has it been discontinued already?)
It has, unless you are running the Corporate Server version (which is based on 9.0).
This would not have been a problem if the upgrade option actually works. When upgrading one of our 9.0 machines to 9.2 (by putting in a MDK 9.2 CD), glibc broke and we couldn't figure out why... so we had to do it again, build a 9.2 machine, and copy data from the 9.0 ones.
No, you didn't *have* to, you just didn't bother to try any other methods (such as booting the rescue boot on the CD and upgrading the necessary packages).
Anyway, I *have* upgraded a number of machines from 9.0 to 9.2 using 'urpmi --auto-select' with *no* problems.
I run Gentoo at home, and upgrading is *VERY* easy:)
You're comparing upgrading your home desktop to a production server???
Anyway, 'urpmi --auto-select' has worked for me in all circumstances (you have no problems you would not have on Gentoo...).
Seems to me you didn't bother to learn how to use the tools you were provided with...
What I mean by this is the existence of installations like:
* Lindows (or whatever they renamed it)
* Knoppix
* Libranet (I think)
So, I guess you are ignoring a bunch of other Red Hat or Fedora-based distros (such as the K12 LTSP distribution) and a number of Mandrake-based distributions (ALT Linux, HP's 441 distribution, PCLinuxOS etc).
This unique property of Debian, over the RPM based installations of SuSE, Fedora, Mandrake, allows others to build specialized OS packages using a common baseline.
I fail to see that. There are distributions based on both Fedora and Mandrake (besides RHEL and Mandrakelinux). Maybe you need to explain this unique property better.
We must be careful to avoid accidentally supporting a software distrubition which cannot be continued as a useful, practical, and free. While Fedora may be free, it is arguably not practically useful or stable for all applications.
Mandrake is both free (all packages in the distribution are under free licenses, and all Mandrakesoft-developed software is under the GPL) and useful/practical/free.
As for the merits of Debian versus Gentoo and other distributions, any discussion in that vein would probably be Off Topic and inflammatory.
So, you posting on the merits of Debian vs Fedora is On Topic and non-inflammatory, but me posting on the merits of Mandrake vs Debian (and debunking your FUD) is not? This makes just as much sense as the rest of your arguments (which have no real facts to support them since your assumptions are invalid).
Slashdot Mirror
Just to be complete:
$ urpmf --summary grass
libgrass5_0:Standalone GRASS Database Access Library
libgrass5_0-devel:Standalone GRASS Database Access Library
grass:Geographic Resources Analysis Support System
libgrass5_0-static-devel:Standalone GRASS Database Access Library
grass54:Geographic Resources Analysis Support System
spearfish-grass:Grass support for the Spearfish sample GIS data set
(BTW, that "grass" is grass-6.0.0:
$ urpmq -r grass
grass-6.0.0-2mdk
)
On that page, you actually *read* the 2nd paragraph, which says:
There are GIMP installers for Windows and FAQs at gimp-win.sourceforge.net. The installers are created by Jernej Simoncic.
So, you go to gimp-win.sourceforge.net, click the download link on the left, which takes you to a page which has another download link.
But, maybe you thought you qualified for The packages below are for people who develop software that use GLib and/or GTK+.?
If you're configuring 5000 machines, and not using the tools available to do customisations like this (autoyast on SuSE, kickstart on RH, Drakx auto-installation on Mandrake), then you're wasting your time.
If you think one AD box will handle 1000 clients, think again - OpenLDAP scales better, you need to tune it some though.
Many users will post about distributions most of us consider to be "closed" and that they have these features, but Mandrake has supported authentication to Windows domains since 9.1 (for NT4 domains) and 10.0 (for AD domains).
But, Pegasus Mail and Mercury Mail (the server-side component) don't only run on a Netwaresolution, they run just fine on Windows NT as well.
But wait, a similar solution has been around in Unix systems forever, NFS sharing the mail spool.
What was your point again?
I couldn't choose what to install, and later found out it didn't include gcc. I installed that only to find it couldn't successfully compile anything!
The only version of Mandrake that doesn't include compilers is the Discovery Edition, which is not avialable for download. But, even on Discovery, you can use online urpmi repositories to install any software you like.
Since this seems to be your main argument, the rest of your post is really invalid.
Please try a bit better with your next troll.
Just like about every other distro which has an option to not install all the kitchen sinks ...
(of course, you left out the libraries that bash requires, like glibc, ncurses or termcap, and I'm guessing you needed at least some tool which is capable of retrieving files from the internet, so you probably needed at least something like wget or curl).
The only difference is what you type before the package name (ie s/pacman/urpmi/g, or s/pacman/yum install/g, s/pacman/apt-get install/g).
Mandrake has had Windows Domain (ie NT4) support during installation since Mandrake 9.1. It supported AD in some AD configurations (ie "Allow anonymous searches in AD" or something like that).
Full AD support is available in 10.1 and Corporate Desktop 3.
Oh, geez, does no one understand the difference between a symbolic mathematics package (like Mathematica, Maple, or Calculation Center) and a numerical mathematics package (like Octave and Matlab)?
...).
...
There might not be such a great difference in functionality between Mathematic/Maple and Matlab, if you have the symbolic math toolbox (although the UI is totally different
Of course, I don't think Octave has a symbolic math toolbox or equivalent at present
The link above is to boot-floppy-rh9.tar.gz, this file contains boot-floppy-rh9-2.4.20-6.img, boot-floppy-rh9-2.4.20.8.img and README. Inside of the img files is six *.msg files, initrd.img, serverworks.patch, splash.lss, syslinux.cfg and vmlinuz files. Inside of the initrd.img files is four files related to kernel modules, two sbin files (one derived from busybox) and 12 etc config files. There are two GPL works used, the kernel and busybox--but none of the files provide the complete text of the GPL and none of the files provide any offer for the complete source code.
Let's remember that this is an updated boot disk for an existing GPL operating system, which fulfils all the requirements of the GPL.
Dell is not distributing the boot disk commercially (although they may have distributed the original GPL operating system commercially in compliance with the GPL).
As such, you should consider RedHat 9 + the boot disk as the entire commercially distributed work, and not the boot disk on it's own.
Since Dell provides the patch (serverworks.patch you reference above), in conjunction with the original kernel-source package for RH9, you have the complete source code for the kernel provided. If RH didn't provide the source code for busybox
Now, you seem to be wanting Dell to support some other distribution than the one for which the requirements (RH9 plus boot disk) of the GPL are valid
I don't see any clause in the GPL which states that who is employed or what is contributed changes the conditions for redistribution. Could you please directly quote the section of the GPL which is relevent to your statement?
Please reply in context. You accused Dell of being a bad member of the community
Could you explain exactly how they are violating the GPL by providing a boot floppy with updated versions of the GPL drivers that are available in the later RH kernels (as I understand, this is your issue)?
...
Since Dell currently employs developers who work on open-source drivers for a number of SCSI cards, and has contributed a number of other pieces of software, I don't see that you should criticising their involvement in the community
So, please provide us with a more detailed description of this supposed GPL violation, or I'll write you off as a troll.
... since they started offering SuSE about 1 month ago.
...
But of course, if you had RTFA, you would have known that
They are not a bunch of secretaries
... you can't deploy the settings easily on Unix, even if you deploy scripts that set http_proxy etc.
... but it works out-the-box on AD) ... but it doesn't really work out-the-box yet although Mandrake 10.1 almost has it)
... and for each one of them I will show you 100 MCSEs who can do that and more with Windows.
So, you're saying Unix doesn't cater for secretaries? Unfortunately, we have secretaries. We don't want them all to have to use Windows, but from what you're saying I guess we should use AD and Windows only?
Since they use awk and grep all the time, please do not suggest some setup with a few dozen icons to launch programs on different machines
You're the one proposing solutions. But, many organisations need to cater to users who would be totally lost running awk.
If you need the MS specific features
I don't need features that are only feasible on MS products. I want to have more automated software management, easier tools to set default settings for groups of users (and not just initially). Take the example of going from not using a proxy server to using one (and not doing a transparent proxy server because you want authentication too). You can deploy the settings with AD
sort of like the difference between using email and MS Exchange
Well, we would like enterprise calendaring, but we don't want Exchange either.
Name one really usefull thing that you can do with Active Directory that you can't do with a well set up LDAP
-push software updates to all clients (ok, so you could script this
-deploy user settings (ie the proxy example above)
-manage the rights users have on their workstations (ok, since sudo 1.6.8 it's easier since we can now deploy our sudo rules in LDAP
-management of SSL certificates
-disconnected authentication (so your laptop users can also use LDAP). This is almost working with pam_ccreds and nss_updatedb, but there are still 3 isues).
Show me the typical Unix admin who can set up a full LDAP and Kerberos implementation with sudo rules etc. and some means of configuration management and software maintenance in one day
The fact remains, it is still a lot more effort to get even the basic single sign-on featuresof LDAPv3 running on Unix than it is to get all the AD features working sufficiently on Windows 2000.
I have users that work on a dozen hosts daily, and they only have to enter their password once - keys handle the rest. "ssh hostname" and they are in as the same user they logged into on the local machine.
Oh, then I guess I should be using that. Oh wait, I am
But, I hope you're not suggesting users should ssh in to the mail server to read their mail, ssh in to the proxy server to use the internet, or ssh to the authentication server as root to add/remove/modify user accounts.
MS didn't invent Kerberos or LDAP
That's right, but I didn't say that. MIT invented one, UoM the other. I am sure you knew that though.
(Active Directory is a subet of this)
Misconception. AD is a lot more than LDAP and Kerberos
, it was available on all breeds of *nix before they used it - just a pain to set up.
Assuming you mean LDAP + Kerberos (and not AD), that was my point. Seems you missed it. We're not there yet, because it is a lot more pain to get *all* the same features as AD provides out-the-box working on *any* Unix (except maybe OS X
If little knocked up in a weekend application B that only compiles on linux can't work with it you use something that can.
Well, then tell my why there is only one GUI Unix mail client that supports GSS-API authentication (I am not sure how many of the console-based ones support GSS-API, but I suspect it's also only 1), no browsers that support GSS-API authentication to proxy servers, no open-source proxy server that supports GSS-API authentication (but the most popular one supports NTLM) and why Samba only recently (3.0.6) got sufficient Kerberos support to even contemplate adding support for some of the basic features in Windows 2000.
Sorry, but, we're not there yet. Anyone who thinks we are either doesn't know where "there" is, or doesn't know where we are.
OpenLDAP + Heimdal + nss_ldap + pam_krb5 + NFSv4 gets us a lot closer than NIS+NFS (for a Unix-only solution with similar features), but still not close enough.
Don't get me wrong, I deploy Free Software solutions, but they're still not as good as they should be to compete. I'm doing my bit
NIS+NFS more secure than Kerberised everything and well-secured LDAP implementation using signed and encryped CIFS?
.... maybe, if your setup was good and your ACLs on your OpenLDAP server were reasonable, it might be more secure.
Sorry, there's no way.
Now, maybe it's more resistant to spyware and virii, but it's not more secure.
Just run:
$ ypcat passwd|jack
to find out how insecure you are!
If you were running Kerberos, OpenLDAP and NFSv4
Yeah, so I've been doing winbind (without Kerberos) on Mandrake since samba-2.2.2, and Mandrake 10.1 or 10.0 Corporate will setup auth to ADS (ie with Kerberos) during install or using drakauth, but that's still not single sign-on.
...
Single sign-on means you enter your password once per session, not that you enter the same password 15 times during the day.
In other words, it's the full Kerberos thing, including support for Kerberos auth in all the preferable mail clients, web browsers, network browsers (not just smbclient -k), FTP clients, IM clients etc etc.
We're not there yet
Huh? Source? Where?
u nderb ird/releases/0.8/thunderbird-source-0.8.tar.bz2
... again.
The directory you point to contains:
File: KEY 3 KB 03/11/04 21:34:00
File: MD5SUMS 1 KB 03/11/04 21:39:00
File: SHA1SUMS 1 KB 03/11/04 21:39:00
File: Thunderbird Setup 0.9.exe 5886 KB 03/11/04 16:49:00
File: Thunderbird Setup 0.9.exe.asc 1 KB 03/11/04 21:39:00
Directory: contrib 03/11/04 21:37:00
Directory: contrib-localized 03/11/04 21:37:00
File: thunderbird-0.9-i686-linux-gtk2+xft.tar.gz 10133 KB 03/11/04 21:35:00
File: thunderbird-0.9-i686-linux-gtk2+xft.tar.gz.asc 1 KB 03/11/04 21:39:00
File: thunderbird-0.9-mac.dmg.gz 11534 KB 03/11/04 21:35:00
File: thunderbird-0.9-mac.dmg.gz.asc 1 KB 03/11/04 21:39:00
File: thunderbird-0.9-win32.zip 7849 KB 03/11/04 16:49:00
File: thunderbird-0.9-win32.zip.asc 1 KB 03/11/04 21:39:00
Directory: windows-xpi 03/11/04
So, we have 3 file integrity verification files (KEY, MD5SUMS, SHA1SUMS), a Windows binary installer and it's signature, a linux GTK2 binary and it's signature, a Mac binary and it's signature, and a Windows binary in a zip file and it's signature, and 3 directories which can either not be entered or have nothing in them.
I'm looking for the equivalent of:
ftp://ftp26moz.newaol.com/pub/mozilla.org/th
Guess we'll have to pull it from CVS
Let's quote that:
...
;-).
If you do not want to use CVS, you can download a source tarball for the latest 0.8 Milestone.
Yes, that is a link to the source for 0.8 (as they say), not 0.9 (which is what we're looking for).
I guess, this being an odd-numbered release, we get to wait an extra month for the source release
BTW, I *did* check the mirrors for 0.9 for source before posting, and no, there isn't any source tarball for 0.9 anywhere yet.
So, seems even the projects page isn't for redistributors
Sorry, but every other application is only considered released when source is available ...
Why is Mozilla.org so unfriendly to Linux distributions????
If other packages can be build on Mandrake, Fedora, then fine -- but I don't think that they will remain free in the broadest sense of the words
You still haven't described that "unique" attribute. I am quite sure in the beginning Debian was not specifically designed as the basis for other distributions. It became necessary for people to make other distributions because Debian moves too slowly. Other distros might not need to be forked (for instance, Mandrake has two different types of Live CDs, both kept in sync with the main distribution).
Now, why can't we have the same thing for hard drive access? So, I download fungame.exe, and when I go to run it, my "firewall" tells me fungame.exe is trying to write to fifteen different directories to install different spyware products.
Don't run software as root.
Oh, you're using Windows. Try using an account with non-Administrative priveleges and see if you can get by with runas.exe to run installers, and ensure that %WINDIR% and anything in your path is not writeable by your normal user account.
Install drivers from Manufacturers CD.
...
Actually, it's:
Install 3 driver CDs from the Manufacturer, and wait 2 hours for them to install (this is after wiating 2 hours for XP itself to install).
Try and find a manufacturer's CD with all your Linux drivers in one place, or for that matter a manufacturer with official support for Linux.
You may have noticed that I only needed one additional driver, since at the time Mandrake 10.0 shipped, this driver did not exist. It will be in 10.1, and then, installation of linux on this model will be possible in 15 with all hardware working and all necessary software installed, vs 4 hours to get XP installed with no useful software.
How is this an argument that Linux is better exactly?
You were the one arguing Linux wasn't ready for the desktop, now it seems you're trying to defend XP
What'll kick butt is when the iw2200 driver gets finished.
I wrote:
To get the remaining hardware working under linux I had to download a driver for the wireless card and adjust the screen resolution.
I used ipw2200-0.4, which now does work, and it's will be in at least 1 kernel for Mandrake 10.1 (hopefully the default too).
(no, it's not as easy as putting in a newer MDK CD, that actually broke the system).
...
:)
...).
...
I have upgraded a number of machines via the 'urpmi --auto-select' method with very few problems.
Anyway, I didn't see your bug reports
And we are getting ready now because 9.0 will soon be discontinued as well (or has it been discontinued already?)
It has, unless you are running the Corporate Server version (which is based on 9.0).
This would not have been a problem if the upgrade option actually works. When upgrading one of our 9.0 machines to 9.2 (by putting in a MDK 9.2 CD), glibc broke and we couldn't figure out why... so we had to do it again, build a 9.2 machine, and copy data from the 9.0 ones.
No, you didn't *have* to, you just didn't bother to try any other methods (such as booting the rescue boot on the CD and upgrading the necessary packages).
Anyway, I *have* upgraded a number of machines from 9.0 to 9.2 using 'urpmi --auto-select' with *no* problems.
I run Gentoo at home, and upgrading is *VERY* easy
You're comparing upgrading your home desktop to a production server???
Anyway, 'urpmi --auto-select' has worked for me in all circumstances (you have no problems you would not have on Gentoo
Seems to me you didn't bother to learn how to use the tools you were provided with
What I mean by this is the existence of installations like:
* Lindows (or whatever they renamed it)
* Knoppix
* Libranet (I think)
So, I guess you are ignoring a bunch of other Red Hat or Fedora-based distros (such as the K12 LTSP distribution) and a number of Mandrake-based distributions (ALT Linux, HP's 441 distribution, PCLinuxOS etc).
This unique property of Debian, over the RPM based installations of SuSE, Fedora, Mandrake, allows others to build specialized OS packages using a common baseline.
I fail to see that. There are distributions based on both Fedora and Mandrake (besides RHEL and Mandrakelinux). Maybe you need to explain this unique property better.
We must be careful to avoid accidentally supporting a software distrubition which cannot be continued as a useful, practical, and free. While Fedora may be free, it is arguably not practically useful or stable for all applications.
Mandrake is both free (all packages in the distribution are under free licenses, and all Mandrakesoft-developed software is under the GPL) and useful/practical/free.
As for the merits of Debian versus Gentoo and other distributions, any discussion in that vein would probably be Off Topic and inflammatory.
So, you posting on the merits of Debian vs Fedora is On Topic and non-inflammatory, but me posting on the merits of Mandrake vs Debian (and debunking your FUD) is not? This makes just as much sense as the rest of your arguments (which have no real facts to support them since your assumptions are invalid).