Well, presumably anything significant that happens to Microsoft would have a profound effect on the acceptance of Linux in the marketplace. Although the article does not say this, one would think this is how it relates to Linux.
If you run debsums, it checks every file on the system that was installed by a Debian package. This will tell you if a file has changed, as by being compromised, or deleted.
Running debsums successfully tells me if a file is checks out with an MD5 sum check, and tells me that it failed when I changed it, and this works when I'm not on the Internet. Lo and behold, if one looks at the apt Packages database, it includes MD5 sums that debsums must use. Thus, Debian packages, at least if you use apt (and why wouldn't you!), include MD5 checksums that can be checked just as easily as with RPM.
Everything in/usr/doc is symlinked to/usr/share/doc if the package has been updated to use the new location for documentation. It really isn't a problem that so many packages had to be updated, because eventually they/are/ all updated for one thing or another, and this update would be included. Consequently, I don't have anything in/usr/doc that's not a symlink, so the transition is complete.
First of all, you only need to get 6 floppy disk images for 6 floppy disks, at most. In some cases, you can get by with only 2 floppy disks.
Secondly, there are ton of "net install ISOs" out there that people have made, for potato, woody and even sid. Ask on #debian on OPN, or do a search on google. They're there.
By "default", almost nothing is installed, so ftpd is not the default FTP daemon. There is no default FTP daemon. You install things when you want them.
While I'm not sure of the cryptographic validity of your statement, assuming your statement is true, there is still a problem. The FBI can never change the virus, or it won't be detected by the software. So, someone could use an older version of the virus pattern files, and block the virus (unless it's using weakened heuristics to prevent detection of the Magic Lantern virus, which would mean that this McAfee action does affect the effectiveness of its products).
There's always been a version of mozilla in there, it's just been M18 the whole time. I'm not amazed that mozilla 0.9.x got in, because that's something that I'm sure a lot of people have been saying is important, so it's been looked at more closely.
As has been said many times before, this is just to get more people to look at the bugs in these packages to get them fixed.
Also, a ton of people use stable. For a server, say for instance a web server running Apache, stable is great. So people do use Apache on stable, and would need it.
You have to just go to IRC or DebianPlanet to make sure things aren't broken. For instance, your gpm problem is posted in the news on OPN on #debian, so if you had checked that before you upgraded, you would know the hold the package until it's fixed.
Great, so some individual can create an unofficial X-based installer, good for them. The problem that I pointed out was having development being diluted with both a console installer and an X-based installer. It would be better to have development of the installer focused entirely on making a good console installer.
The Debian installer is easy, as long as you know your hardware. Now, the two things that people most frequently site that supposedly would make it easier to use are hardware autodetection and the usage of an X installer.
Hardware autodetection is great, if you don't mind having it simply not work and freezing a user's system every once in a while. It's not hard to just have a person enter in their hardware.
An X installer is just silly, as if a higher resolution increases ease of use at all. Including an X installer poses many problems, mainly that it would diverge development on the installer. It would be far better to just have an excellent console installer. Furthermore, including an X installer would dramatically increase the size of the Debian installation system (which currently fits on a few floppy disks), and, again, would have the problem of unsupported hardware. A system administrator shouldn't need to waste time downloading, loading, and then later uninstalling X because it was never needed it to run his web server in the first place.
Despite that people use the word "stupid" to describe a broad range of characteristics, teenagers, rather than thinking their parents have a lack of raw intelligence, think, or know, their parents have a possible lack of understanding of their lives. This is not a judgement on parents' intelligence.
You mean a release schedule which releases stable and sane/cohesive systems, rather than buggy crap like some other distribution makers release in trying to fit deadlines or some crazy quick release schedule? There should be an active branch that is stable. If a person wants to use a less stable branch they should be able to, just like in Debian, do that, and they CAN do that.
I didn't say anything about a "default choice of config" or "Critical" or anything. If you really had been using Linux for 3 years (rather than just playing koules after booting into X all the time) all the package options would make complete sense. They're not that difficult even if you don't know much about Linux.
There's nothing wrong with the Debian installation. It's very easy, if you just know your hardware. It's much better this way that, rather than autodetecting hardware (possibly causing the system to lock up), having an excellent, focused, console installation, and not flooding many users with things they have no need or use for, the Debian installation is quick and painless.
SafeSurf does not use any of the services that they are complaining about. They don't use TeleGlobe. Other people use an ISP that connects via TeleGlobe, which blocks the site. SafeSurf has no say in the matter.
If you find a bug in the kernel and fix it, in order to implement the fix in working order on your machine, you have to install a new kernel and reboot, thereby losing your uptime.
To upgrade your system requires simply typing: apt-get upgrade
There's nothing more simple than that. Just because it's not graphical doesn't mean it's difficult, and in fact, it can be easier. Regardless, the average user who you say wouldn't be able to use apt doesn't even use Windows Update. The fact is the people who wouldn't be able to find it or remember what to do with apt are not able to figure out Windows Update.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, presumably anything significant that happens to Microsoft would have a profound effect on the acceptance of Linux in the marketplace. Although the article does not say this, one would think this is how it relates to Linux.
If you run debsums, it checks every file on the system that was installed by a Debian package. This will tell you if a file has changed, as by being compromised, or deleted.
Running debsums successfully tells me if a file is checks out with an MD5 sum check, and tells me that it failed when I changed it, and this works when I'm not on the Internet. Lo and behold, if one looks at the apt Packages database, it includes MD5 sums that debsums must use. Thus, Debian packages, at least if you use apt (and why wouldn't you!), include MD5 checksums that can be checked just as easily as with RPM.
Everything in /usr/doc is symlinked to /usr/share/doc if the package has been updated to use the new location for documentation. It really isn't a problem that so many packages had to be updated, because eventually they /are/ all updated for one thing or another, and this update would be included. Consequently, I don't have anything in /usr/doc that's not a symlink, so the transition is complete.
What are you talking about? New versions of Debian aren't released often, so a netinst ISO might be "modern" for a good 2 years, that's not outdated.
Testing works great for me, that's 4 working systems out of 4 I've installed it on. No problems I didn't get in some other /released/ distributions.
Secondly, there are ton of "net install ISOs" out there that people have made, for potato, woody and even sid. Ask on #debian on OPN, or do a search on google. They're there.
By "default", almost nothing is installed, so ftpd is not the default FTP daemon. There is no default FTP daemon. You install things when you want them.
While I'm not sure of the cryptographic validity of your statement, assuming your statement is true, there is still a problem. The FBI can never change the virus, or it won't be detected by the software. So, someone could use an older version of the virus pattern files, and block the virus (unless it's using weakened heuristics to prevent detection of the Magic Lantern virus, which would mean that this McAfee action does affect the effectiveness of its products).
No they don't. If there's a security fix, it would say "blah blah security fix blah blah, not being specific here because of DMCA".
There's always been a version of mozilla in there, it's just been M18 the whole time. I'm not amazed that mozilla 0.9.x got in, because that's something that I'm sure a lot of people have been saying is important, so it's been looked at more closely.
Also, a ton of people use stable. For a server, say for instance a web server running Apache, stable is great. So people do use Apache on stable, and would need it.
You have to just go to IRC or DebianPlanet to make sure things aren't broken. For instance, your gpm problem is posted in the news on OPN on #debian, so if you had checked that before you upgraded, you would know the hold the package until it's fixed.
Great, so some individual can create an unofficial X-based installer, good for them. The problem that I pointed out was having development being diluted with both a console installer and an X-based installer. It would be better to have development of the installer focused entirely on making a good console installer.
Hardware autodetection is great, if you don't mind having it simply not work and freezing a user's system every once in a while. It's not hard to just have a person enter in their hardware.
An X installer is just silly, as if a higher resolution increases ease of use at all. Including an X installer poses many problems, mainly that it would diverge development on the installer. It would be far better to just have an excellent console installer. Furthermore, including an X installer would dramatically increase the size of the Debian installation system (which currently fits on a few floppy disks), and, again, would have the problem of unsupported hardware. A system administrator shouldn't need to waste time downloading, loading, and then later uninstalling X because it was never needed it to run his web server in the first place.
Despite that people use the word "stupid" to describe a broad range of characteristics, teenagers, rather than thinking their parents have a lack of raw intelligence, think, or know, their parents have a possible lack of understanding of their lives. This is not a judgement on parents' intelligence.
You mean a release schedule which releases stable and sane/cohesive systems, rather than buggy crap like some other distribution makers release in trying to fit deadlines or some crazy quick release schedule? There should be an active branch that is stable. If a person wants to use a less stable branch they should be able to, just like in Debian, do that, and they CAN do that.
I didn't say anything about a "default choice of config" or "Critical" or anything. If you really had been using Linux for 3 years (rather than just playing koules after booting into X all the time) all the package options would make complete sense. They're not that difficult even if you don't know much about Linux.
There's nothing wrong with the Debian installation. It's very easy, if you just know your hardware. It's much better this way that, rather than autodetecting hardware (possibly causing the system to lock up), having an excellent, focused, console installation, and not flooding many users with things they have no need or use for, the Debian installation is quick and painless.
SafeSurf does not use any of the services that they are complaining about. They don't use TeleGlobe. Other people use an ISP that connects via TeleGlobe, which blocks the site. SafeSurf has no say in the matter.
This isn't an "even he did this" kind of thing. He's one of the most outspoken proponents of this thing.
If you find a bug in the kernel and fix it, in order to implement the fix in working order on your machine, you have to install a new kernel and reboot, thereby losing your uptime.
Since when is FreeBSD the only OS with a predictable layout, and since when is that a novel notion?
To upgrade your system requires simply typing: apt-get upgrade
There's nothing more simple than that. Just because it's not graphical doesn't mean it's difficult, and in fact, it can be easier. Regardless, the average user who you say wouldn't be able to use apt doesn't even use Windows Update. The fact is the people who wouldn't be able to find it or remember what to do with apt are not able to figure out Windows Update.
What's old, clunky, and insecure about inetd?