Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 10th Nov 2006 15:08 UTC
SuSE, openSUSE OpenSUSE 10.2 Beta 2 has been released. "I'm glad to announce the second beta of openSUSE 10.2 codename Basilisk Lizard. It contains a large number of enhancements and updates done by the open source community and Novell's development teams. For Beta 2 we updated to OpenSync 0.20 and would ask for some testing by the community. We have prepared some testcases for specific mobile devices, like mobile phones which synchronize with SyncML, IrMC and other protocols. The testcases also include simple connection tests for Palm Devices. We would really appreciate any help and hopefully many success reports."
Order by: Score:
v ignore list
by deanlinkous on Fri 10th Nov 2006 15:20 UTC
RE: ignore list
by thebluesgnr on Fri 10th Nov 2006 15:29 UTC in reply to "ignore list"
thebluesgnr Member since:
2005-11-14

Yes, you can. The first step to ignore it is to NOT post replies on openSUSE topics.

Reply Score: 5

RE: ignore list
by twenex on Fri 10th Nov 2006 15:34 UTC in reply to "ignore list"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

Ignore list? is there such a thing here?

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: ignore list
by deanlinkous on Fri 10th Nov 2006 18:32 UTC in reply to "RE: ignore list"
deanlinkous Member since:
2006-06-19

good idea isn't it
OWWWW whoever modded me down and down and down and down
;)

Reply Score: 1

looks good, can't wait to read the reports
by REMF on Fri 10th Nov 2006 15:20 UTC
REMF
Member since:
2006-02-05

any clue on the inclusion or lack thereof of a quick "Enable XGL" button when using KDE as the DE?

Reply Score: 3

Community Unfriendly
by 2fargone on Fri 10th Nov 2006 15:26 UTC
2fargone
Member since:
2006-02-20

The company who supports OpenSUSE is proving itself to be a poor community player. Before making plans of installing, testing, or deploying, I highly suggest you investigate and think hard about whether SUSE or OpenSUSE will meet your needs both in software and community support (which has been devistated by the company's actions).

Reply Score: 1

RE: Community Unfriendly
by jakesdad on Fri 10th Nov 2006 15:36 UTC in reply to "Community Unfriendly"
jakesdad Member since:
2005-12-28

Thats funny for a community that has been devastated to release a product on time.

I love how people are spreading FUD just as much as any company. I hope everyone is happy to become the monster they despise.

Make sure you look to see if the distro you are using is using the build service provided by the opensuse community for the community at large.

So how exactly is it not a community player? It is letting the FSF lawyers look at their agreement to see what is going on, thats pretty open in my opinion.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Community Unfriendly
by twenex on Fri 10th Nov 2006 15:50 UTC in reply to "RE: Community Unfriendly"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

It isn't FUD that we don't know the full details of what's going on.

It's not FUD that we have worries of MS proprietarizing Linux the way it proprietarized LDAP and created ActiveDirectory.

It isn't FUD that of the two, the company we're most suspicious of is doing the least to reach out to us.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Community Unfriendly
by jakesdad on Fri 10th Nov 2006 16:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Community Unfriendly"
jakesdad Member since:
2005-12-28

It is FUD when you are spreading Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt when you don't have all the details.

The opensuse mailing list said it best... "Headless chicken mode".

I would say that Novell is doing everything they need to do. They are allowing the FSF counsel to review the agreements. Until you get that analysis everything is speculation. And I dont remember hearing or reading anywhere that Novell would not take the analysis and make modifications.

By the way, when did open sourcing your software mean that you need to divulge all your business practices? Given that it hasnt been proven Novell is in violation of anything.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: Community Unfriendly
by 2fargone on Fri 10th Nov 2006 16:15 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Community Unfriendly"
2fargone Member since:
2006-02-20

Novell might be in compliance with the GPL, might, but the point is what Novell did injures the GPL community regardless.

If you want proof, look how the community is dividing. At a time it's critical we don't. What more needs to be said?

Novell is not a good community player.

Reply Score: 5

RE[5]: Community Unfriendly
by jakesdad on Fri 10th Nov 2006 16:24 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Community Unfriendly"
jakesdad Member since:
2005-12-28

I'd say the community was already divided... With the GPL V3. Cause that's what this will all boil down to.

Why is it critical that we dont. Maybe someone has a better idea. (i dont know who has this, its just an example). If we all huddle together and only force one view how is that any different than a proprietary company?

Reply Score: 5

v RE[5]: Community Unfriendly
by Mitarai on Fri 10th Nov 2006 16:33 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Community Unfriendly"
RE[5]: Community Unfriendly
by dostrowski on Fri 10th Nov 2006 17:07 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Community Unfriendly"
dostrowski Member since:
2006-11-10

Novell might be in compliance with the GPL, might, but the point is what Novell did injures the GPL community regardless.

And what injuries are these? What actual damage, other than people screaming bloody murder, have been done to the GPL community? Have your rights to use GPL software been reduced? How is the situation with using GPL software any different for the "community" now than it was 6 months ago?

If you want proof, look how the community is dividing. At a time it's critical we don't. What more needs to be said?

The open source community is ALWAYS divided. KDE people don't like GNOME people and vice vertsa, Mandriva people are scoffed at by Gentoo people who are scoffed at by Red Hat people, etc. etc. etc.

There is, and has been, very little unity ANYWHERE in the open source community for as long as it's existed and that includes the divisions caused by the GPL v 3. Linus and Stallman don't even see eye to eye, so I'm not sure where this assumed "unity" is you are inferring.

Novell is not a good community player.

1) They are not community property. They're a business. The goal of business is not, by the way, to make you happy or to make the open source community at large happy. The goal is to make a good product that makes money for the investors.

2) I would argue that even though they ARE a business, their contributions to the open source community, so far, have been pretty good. Despite being punished by shareholders for every action they've taken they have GPL'ed a lot of previously non-GPL software and continue to contribute to KDE and the OpenSuSE project and employ a lot of great Open Source people.

(Edited for poor spelling.)

Edited 2006-11-10 17:12

Reply Score: 5

RE[6]: Community Unfriendly
by Mitarai on Fri 10th Nov 2006 17:09 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Community Unfriendly"
Mitarai Member since:
2005-07-28

You are so right, I totally second that.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Community Unfriendly
by jakesdad on Fri 10th Nov 2006 17:15 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Community Unfriendly"
jakesdad Member since:
2005-12-28

Good post, very sensible.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Community Unfriendly
by fsckit on Fri 10th Nov 2006 22:14 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Community Unfriendly"
fsckit Member since:
2006-09-24

Not that I entirely disagree with you but exactly what software has Novell open sourced. So far I know of only YAST, which

1) Doesn't work on anything but SUSE Linux because it's a huge piece of...perl scripting.

2) Was not invented by Novell but came along with the SUSE purchase.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Community Unfriendly
by grat on Fri 10th Nov 2006 22:31 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Community Unfriendly"
grat Member since:
2006-02-02

Not that I entirely disagree with you but exactly what software has Novell open sourced.

YaST - The team porting it to debian ran into real-life issues.

iFolder - A terribly underrated piece of software.

Hula - NetMail was at one point going to be a replacement engine for groupwise. It's unknown how much of the NetMail codebase wound up in GW7, but Hula is still a fairly decent looking package, and NetMail scales to ludicrous levels quite easily.

Bandit - This isn't quite fair, since Bandit was designed to be open source to start with, but still, it's an open-source identity management framework.

Then of course there's XGL/Compiz, which in spite of the community getting up in arms about it's development process, was also released open source.

I'd say for a company founded on proprietary software, Novell has made a better than average effort at giving back to the open source community. Still, though, I'd like to see them make NSS open source. It's a very nice file system.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Community Unfriendly
by deanlinkous on Fri 10th Nov 2006 18:36 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Community Unfriendly"
deanlinkous Member since:
2006-06-19

Novell ISN'T in violation of anything. That is exactly what is so dirty about it. They did a wink,wink snicker,snicker with microsoft and found a way to essentially create a proprietary linux distro while hurting or killing every other commercial linux until such time that micrsoft is in a position to then kill off novell AGAIN!

Reply Score: 3

v RE[5]: Community Unfriendly
by Mitarai on Fri 10th Nov 2006 18:42 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Community Unfriendly"
RE[6]: Community Unfriendly
by andrewg on Fri 10th Nov 2006 19:04 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Community Unfriendly"
andrewg Member since:
2005-07-06

Ad hominem attacks typically imply the person is incapable of argument or lost the argument.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Community Unfriendly
by deanlinkous on Fri 10th Nov 2006 20:56 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Community Unfriendly"
deanlinkous Member since:
2006-06-19

It is mandatory in your cult to spread FUD?
No not mandatory but you get extra kool-aid if you do! Yummy grape kool-aid!

Can you point out whats so FUDdy about my post? THink about it. Microsoft promises not to sue for patent/IP stuff in novell linux products. This means novell can load ANYTHING from microsoft without worry now. They create this linux that can walk, talk and smell like a windows system. Now a business can use linux from novell and it will function as well as windows and do everything windows does and they have the assurance that it is a MS approved software. Or they could attempt to use another linux and MS wold threaten them and it would not open all the MS formats and so forth. Which do you think a business will choose?

Want to know why vista prices will be higher? Because the low cost version of "windows" will be called novell linux!

Reply Score: 1

v RE[7]: Community Unfriendly
by Mitarai on Fri 10th Nov 2006 22:16 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Community Unfriendly"
RE[8]: Community Unfriendly
by twenex on Sat 11th Nov 2006 17:53 UTC in reply to "RE[7]: Community Unfriendly"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

So state the reason's why it's FUD then.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Community Unfriendly
by grat on Fri 10th Nov 2006 22:18 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Community Unfriendly"
grat Member since:
2006-02-02

Microsoft promises not to sue for patent/IP stuff in novell linux products. This means novell can load ANYTHING from microsoft without worry now.

Uhh... No.

First off, nothing in the agreement would stop Microsoft from suing Novell for doing this. Secondly, the protection will last, at most, 5 years.

Most of your posts are uninformed speculation that has more to do with conspiracy theories, than with sound business practices.

They also ignore repeated statements by Novell, the Mono team, and the openSuSE team, that they remain committed to AVOIDING patent encumbered code.

Personally, I'm going to predict that any interoperability improvements made by Novell can, and will, find their way into the linux community, and will do so unencumbered. Any improvements made by Microsoft will, unfortunately, remain closed, proprietary, and unavailable to the general public.

As it is, openSuSE 10.1 already plays much, much nicer with AD than most-- Adding an openSuSE workstation to AD requires a few clicks, and a domain password. The configuration of samba/winbind/pam happens in the background, invisible to the user.

Reply Score: 1

RE[8]: Community Unfriendly
by twenex on Sat 11th Nov 2006 17:58 UTC in reply to "RE[7]: Community Unfriendly"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21


Personally, I'm going to predict that any interoperability improvements made by Novell can, and will, find their way into the linux community, and will do so unencumbered. Any improvements made by Microsoft will, unfortunately, remain closed, proprietary, and unavailable to the general public.


That is, in fact, almost exactly what Novell have said.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Community Unfriendly
by andrewg on Fri 10th Nov 2006 18:57 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Community Unfriendly"
andrewg Member since:
2005-07-06

It is FUD when you are spreading Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt when you don't have all the details.

There is uncertainty and doubt because we don't have the details. We have uncertainty and doubt because it is a fact that Microsoft has not precluded the possibility of sueing authors or the software under the GPL. By grantng certain parties exemption for the possibility of law suit they have implicitly stated that they may sue.

The broader GPL community is upset because Novell has brokered a deal with a notorious company that gives them or only their customers special protection against this same company. Which is totally contrary to the spirit if not the letter of the license. The 'letter' of course remains to be seen.

Lastly when 'FUD' is used it implies Fear Uncertainty and Doubt where no real justification exists. In this case there is very real justification. Nothing wrong with being legitemately fearful, uncertain or doubtful.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: Community Unfriendly
by twenex on Sat 11th Nov 2006 17:49 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Community Unfriendly"
twenex Member since:
2006-04-21

How can it be FUD to say we don't have all the details when, er, we don't have all the details?

I would say that Novell is doing everything they need to do. They are allowing the FSF counsel to review the agreements. Until you get that analysis everything is speculation.

That's true, but it's also true that MS might be interpreting things a little differently. They certainly seemed to do that with the "Open Letter from Novell", and there are plenty other precedents. I want assurance from MS more than from Novell. If they give us that and stay true to their word, fair do's to them.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Community Unfriendly
by 2fargone on Fri 10th Nov 2006 16:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Community Unfriendly"
2fargone Member since:
2006-02-20

Novell actions supports Microsoft's FUD. What Novell has done was cast a shadow of doubt over all GLP software, without once asking anyone else in the community if they wanted to live under that shadow. Maybe if the community Novell is trying to profit from would have had the chance for at least some input BEFORE Novell did what they did, then maybe... but they didn't. They made a unilateral move that injured all GPL users, including SUSE users, with only the consideration of their pocketbook.

Mod me down, mod me up. Doesn't change the truth. Novell screwed up bad and may have damaged the community in ways it will take a miricale and/or decades to fix.

I'm not saying that in the future events may play out and this proves to be a positive for OSS. But on the surface and from initial review, this looks to be a bad move, not just for the community, but for all GPL users.

And the sad part is I don't think Novell did it to hurt anyone, except the part that gives Novell a competitive advantage, but I think they did it because bill collectors and stockholders wanted Novell to act like a corporation and increase the bottom line. I don't think the new CEO had any idea what OSS is about and acted in a way to increase Novell's bottom line. All without considering what the long term affects this was going to generate, both for the community and for Novell.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: Community Unfriendly
by jakesdad on Fri 10th Nov 2006 16:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Community Unfriendly"
jakesdad Member since:
2005-12-28

Screwed up? I dunno maybe. Just because people dont like the current situation doesnt mean it is a screw up though.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Community Unfriendly
by ACarlow on Fri 10th Nov 2006 17:51 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Community Unfriendly"
ACarlow Member since:
2005-10-18

"Mod me down, mod me up. Doesn't change the truth. Novell screwed up bad and may have damaged the community in ways it will take a miricale and/or decades to fix."

Such hyperbole creates the kind of "FUD" you are railing against. How on earth you go from merely one decision by one of many Linux vendors to that kind of doom and gloom is really quite incomprehensible. Especially when it is entirely unknown what the consequences will be if any of that decision.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Community Unfriendly
by backdoc on Sat 11th Nov 2006 02:02 UTC in reply to "RE: Community Unfriendly"
backdoc Member since:
2006-01-14

Thank you.

I'm pretty tired of people bashing SUSE over this. It's not a distro that I use. But, I think they have been good Linux citizens, even more so since Novell aquired them. I know they opened YaST. What about the Ximian Connector?? I'm sure there are a ton of other contributions they've made.

Anyway, they are not evil for making a deal with Microsoft. I'm sure it benefits both companies.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Community Unfriendly
by tspears on Fri 10th Nov 2006 15:52 UTC in reply to "Community Unfriendly"
tspears Member since:
2006-05-22

openSuSE is not the same as SLED/SLES/OES.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Community Unfriendly
by rexbinary on Fri 10th Nov 2006 18:47 UTC in reply to "Community Unfriendly"
rexbinary Member since:
2006-01-04

Very good advice.

Reply Score: 1

real time tools for free suse?
by project_2501 on Fri 10th Nov 2006 16:00 UTC
project_2501
Member since:
2006-03-20

I wonder if these real-time userland tools will be part of a freely downloadable version if Suse at any time?

http://www.novell.com/products/realtime/

Of particular interest is the cpu shielding mechanism. A shielded cpu is only allowed to run nominated processes, usually a single process that you want to respond with greater determinism - your main service or application. This means that your normal OS and background processes are run on other non-shielded cpus, leaving the interesting process(es) to run solely on the shielded cpu(s).

Further to this cpu process affinity, the cpu is actually shielded from interrupts. Interrupts, being highest priority, are the main cause of jitter by pre-empting even high priority tasks. By using non-shielded cpus or cores to deal with common interrupts, we can leave the nominated shielded cpus to deal with zero or only relevant interrupts.

here is a link to a paper - its a little old (kernel 2.4) but the ideas are the same: http://www.ccur.com/isddocs/wp-shielded-cpu.pdf

The linux kernel itself has the functionality to do the above - but the userland tools are the value added by Novell.

This work was done between Novell and Concurrent and brought to Suse Enterprise Edition. Novell would do a great service by allowing these tools tobe freely downloadable and usable - lowering the barriers to access such technology, in the spirit of much open and free software.

Reply Score: 4

look how the community is dividing
by REMF on Fri 10th Nov 2006 16:19 UTC
REMF
Member since:
2006-02-05

i see headless chickens running around squarking a lot about something which they don't know the details, and frankly i don't believe they would understand if they were given all the details.

but what's a zealot gonna do if someone does something odd and different that impinges on their rose tinted view of how the community operates and interacts with business? squark a lot, obviously.

Reply Score: 5

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

i see headless chickens running around squarking a lot about something which they don't know the details

I see a lot of people running around mouthing off stuff like "You don't have details! You don't have details!" when those details have been pointed out.

The bottom line is that Novell's management is supporting Microsoft's campaign of FUD against open source software. Period. By all accounts, especially reading around Groklaw, this agreement is utterly meaningless which is how they plan to get around the GPL. Microsoft's Patent Pledge for Developers is a good laugh, and gives Microsoft just such a platform for spreading more FUD to unsuspecting people:

"Are you thinking of buying from a Linux distributor? I'd think twice if I were you. Look at Novell. They had to do a deal with us to ensure they were legal. Go with us. We have some coupons to sell the legal Suse distribution, but we'd be happy to sell you Windows instead."

etc. etc.

You really think that helps?

It's just a pity that OpenSUSE is being dragged through the mud here. The guys at Suse still know how to put together a first rate KDE desktop distribution.

Reply Score: 5

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Since you are the #1 anti Novell troll your credibility is zero here, Im sorry, just don't waste our time,

Since you don't have the attention span and intelligence to read anything beyond one sentence, and you reply to anything with the words "Troll", "Long and boring" and various other intellectually sharp comments, I find that funny.

we won't belive any kind of FUD coming from you, thx.

Who's this 'we'? You don't think anyone shares your point of view do you? Whatever view that happens to be.

Well dont for taking things even more off-topic than they already are - because you have no idea what you're talking about, or what others are talking about. As your first lesson, I suggest you look up the acronym FUD.

Reply Score: 3

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

...don't waste your and our time, thx and have a good day.

Who's this 'our'?

Reply Score: 2

jakesdad Member since:
2005-12-28

Well if the issue is protection maybe you should be fighting the government about changing the patent laws. This seems like misdirected anger to me.

The main complaint that I seem to be running across is the patent angle. If the GPL V3 was not being worked on I would think this would not be the big deal that it has mushroomed into.

So instead of blasting companies that are trying to work within the confines of the laws and licenses maybe people should direct their energy to changing the laws instead of dictating the actions of a company.

Also you dont know if the deal was placed so MS would be legal with Novell's patents. I personally feel that this may have been initialized by Novell. But only because they had some dirt on MS violating patents that Novell holds in relation to e-directory and UNIX (SFU).

Now i'm rambling.... But it is a lively discussion none the less ;)

Reply Score: 2

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Well if the issue is protection maybe you should be fighting the government about changing the patent laws.

Since Novell is such a friend of the open source community, maybe they should be doing that themselves rather than endorsing Microsoft's view of things? I'm not entirely sure what you're expecting me or anyone else to do.

This seems like misdirected anger to me.

You think wrong. I'm not too sure where you're picking up anger.

The main complaint that I seem to be running across is the patent angle. If the GPL V3 was not being worked on I would think this would not be the big deal that it has mushroomed into.

You have quite clearly done no readng around this subject.

So instead of blasting companies that are trying to work within the confines of the laws and licenses maybe people should direct their energy to changing the laws...

Errrrr, no. As an open source company relying on open source software, Novell should be taking a lead for the software that they depend on and making a stand themselves.

Also you dont know if the deal was placed so MS would be legal with Novell's patents.

Considering that Novell's customers are getting a nice covenant not to sue them (them, not Novell mind you) it's fairly clear who's getting the mindshare here.

I personally feel that this may have been initialized by Novell.

Yer. That much was admitted.

But only because they had some dirt on MS violating patents that Novell holds in relation to e-directory and UNIX (SFU).

I see no evidence for that anywhere. It was initiated by Ron Hovsepian, and considering that he and Novell have talked a lot for months about 'indemnification', it becomes pretty clear why Novell initiated this deal.

Their revenue has still been declining, Netware people are still leaving, they still have no real idea how to improve their software and turn it into sales and they need something...anything...to try and get some competitive advantage.

Telling their existing and potential customers that they're all at risk of getting sued from Microsoft, so they're getting a covenant direct from Microsoft that that won't happen, seems as good an idea as any to try and convince people.

Reply Score: 4

dostrowski Member since:
2006-11-10

I must say that I'm not all flowers and happiness about this deal either, but I have a few comments to add.

Errrrr, no. As an open source company relying on open source software, Novell should be taking a lead for the software that they depend on and making a stand themselves.

Novell is not an open source company. They are just a company. They happen to have bought a company that packages an open source product, but the business logic behind that was initially as a vessel for selling their Netware, eDirectory, etc. on operating system "turf" that wasn't completely controlled by Microsoft, since Microsoft has traditionally not done a fantastic job giving Novell the knowledge and resources to let it compete against themself.

Novell isn't expected to go to the "rescue" of open source software if it's not in their best interest to do so, from a business standpoint.

Telling their existing and potential customers that they're all at risk of getting sued from Microsoft, so they're getting a covenant direct from Microsoft that that won't happen, seems as good an idea as any to try and convince people.

I think that this is eclipsed by their other gains. The gain of having a "Microsoft supported" distro means a lot to people who otherwise depend on Microsoft and see them as very reliable and influential. That is a bigger selling point, I would think, and there are many other benefits to the deal as well.

I know many people have been saying that Novell's message is "Use Red Hat and be sued" but I'm not sure where the basis for that comes from other than conjecture.

Reply Score: 4

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Novell is not an open source company. They are just a company.

That's news to everyone but you, because that's exactly how Novell are marketing themselves:

http://developer.novell.com/opensource/

Search for the words 'open source' and 'community' in the Novell CTO's blog:

http://www.novell.com/ctoblog/

Besides the fact that Novell is depending on a lot of open source software existing to actually build the stuff that they sell. If that software is threatened, or worse, it goes away then Novell lose and they have to start maintaining an awful lot of software on their own.

I think that this is eclipsed by their other gains.

So you admit they're actually telling their customers they're at risk of being sued by Microsoft in order to make this Microsoft deal a selling point?

The gain of having a "Microsoft supported" distro means a lot to people who otherwise depend on Microsoft and see them as very reliable and influential.

In what way would they gain?

That is a bigger selling point...

The biggest selling point that Novell could make, from my point of view with people who work with Novell software, is actually making software that works. Namely, making software like Groupwise 7 actually work without simply sticking out one massive service pack one year later.

I know many people have been saying that Novell's message is "Use Red Hat and be sued" but I'm not sure where the basis for that comes from...

You don't know customers very well, do you? That's exactly what Novell have knowingly, or unknowngly, said with this deal. They're giving everyone the impression of a Microsoft approved and a Microsoft unapproved distribution.

...other than conjecture.

Perhaps you should do more reading:

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20061103201234813

"I suspect that [customers] will take that issue up with their distributor," Ballmer said. Or if customers are considering doing a direct download of a non-SUSE Linux version, "they'll think twice about that," he said.

That's exactly how Ballmer views it, and Novell have endorsed it.

Reply Score: 2

dostrowski Member since:
2006-11-10

That's news to everyone but you, because that's exactly how Novell are marketing themselves:

How you market yourself is not always a reflection of actual business practices and dependancies. Regardless about how friendly they're trying to make themselves to potential developers, and who wouldn't?, the majority of their income, last I checked, does not come from their Open Source products. That may have changed, but I would be surprised, even at this point.

So you admit they're actually telling their customers they're at risk of being sued by Microsoft in order to make this Microsoft deal a selling point?

With all due respect, don't put words in my mouth. I don't "admit" that Novell is telling their customers ANYTHING because I don't know what they're telling them, and, my suspicion is, you don't either. I suppose I should have said "I think this potential application of the arrangement is eclipsed by..." and then maybe you wouldn't have tried to twist my words.

You don't know customers very well, do you? That's exactly what Novell have knowingly, or unknowngly, said with this deal. They're giving everyone the impression of a Microsoft approved and a Microsoft unapproved distribution.

I'm not sure how "Microsoft approved" INSTANTLY translates only into "Microsoft will not sue you!" rather than an endorsement and support from a large, influential company.

That's exactly how Ballmer views it, and Novell have endorsed it.

Ballmer is not a nice man. However, I'm not sure how Ballmer views it instantly equates to Novell endorsing it.

Reply Score: 2

Moochman Member since:
2005-07-06

Novell is not an open source company. They are just a company. They happen to have bought a company that packages an open source product, but the business logic behind that was initially as a vessel for selling their Netware, eDirectory, etc. on operating system "turf" that wasn't completely controlled by Microsoft, since Microsoft has traditionally not done a fantastic job giving Novell the knowledge and resources to let it compete against themself.

This is exactly the issue. Novell took over Suse and promised "we'll be good members of the open-source community, we won't let our Suse customers down, we believe in cooperation between distros, look at us, we're open sourcing our products!" And now it turns out that this whole "transformation" was nothing but one big sham. If you want to see an example of what a proprietary software-turned open source company SHOULD look like, look at Sun. They're staying the course and opening up more and more things and cooperating with other companies, rather than setting themselves up as an ally of MS against all other open-source players. (Admittedly, they have their hardware business to back them up, so it's not a totally fair comparison.) But the point nevertheless remains, the cooperative atmosphere between Suse and other open-source companies will from this point on be largely nullified, which is the total wrong way to go about things.

Reply Score: 1

OpenSuse and Community
by andrewpl28 on Fri 10th Nov 2006 16:59 UTC
andrewpl28
Member since:
2005-07-11

After weeks of SuSE/Novell bashing it is really getting annoying to hear such things especially on high profile forums and websites. I am not defending Novell on their actions nor am I saying that what they have done is right but, I think we had enough of it by now. I've been using Suse since version 9.0 as well as others, fedora, Mandrake, and etc, and I think it is a great distro and ever since its acquisition by Novell the only thing I hear is constant bashing. From my view I think Novell has done alot for Suse and the community by sponsoring many projects and releasing alot of the code which was once proprietary. Honestly, I can say from a business standpoint and user one that this kind of unfriendliness is the reason why Linux will continue being an underdog and windows and other OS' will surpass it. I've worked with multiple companies and one of the biggest issues they had with using Linux is the constant bad publicity it had given them selves. To those corporate users to see such a bashing in articles and forums, as usually that is the first thing they'll do their research on, is one of the biggest turnoffs. Just days ago I heard one individual who was planning to migrate his servers to Linux decided to opt for Free-BSD or a variation of it. Don't get me wrong, I think that everyone should be verbal and voice their opinion which is the beauty of Open Source, but some of the comments made on this and other forums make absolutely no sense and sound like gibberish. None of us actually know what was the reason for this agreement and until we know the details, at least I, will refrain making any non-sense accusations and comments. Furthermore, some of the personal attacks on individuals, whom will rename anonymous, are really uncalled for as you are attacking the same individuals who are responsible for bringing alot of this technology to you as end user and community member. In my opinion Novell should release the whole details on this issue with MS to the whole community. With that said, do I think this will solve the problem? No. I think that some individuals are so set on destroying and naming MS and any cooperation with them as the devil forgot the true purpose of the open source, "Freedom". After looking at all the bits and pieces of all these articles and posts the only thing I wish Novell clarified and explained is the patent protection and what it implied to meaning if it infringed upon any patents if any. This implies to software which was developed or being developed. Furthermore, the arguments that Novell is against the community because the signed a contract with MS is just ridiculous, just listen to yourself. This argument is so common in the Open Source community that its getting to a point where its imposible to distinguish who is right or wrong. Just example Gnome vs. KDE community divided, c vs. c++, firefox vs. Konqueror vs. Epiphany, there are even arguments over logos. I thing at this rate the community is dividing itself and instead of working together to make sure that our worse fears don't come back and haunt us we instead bicker over little things. As for the Main post I really don't understand why people immediately start to troll in post such as this instead of giving their support to the developers who are working hard to make their software usable for anyone, and even if you don't use this distro, alot of the code is put back into community which will be used in another.

Reply Score: 5

RE: OpenSuse and Community
by Mitarai on Fri 10th Nov 2006 17:04 UTC in reply to "OpenSuse and Community"
Mitarai Member since:
2005-07-28

Actually is correct, the enemy of "The community" is not MS but "The community" it self.

Edited 2006-11-10 17:06

Reply Score: 5

RE: OpenSuse and Community
by fsckit on Fri 10th Nov 2006 22:25 UTC in reply to "OpenSuse and Community"
fsckit Member since:
2006-09-24

After weeks of SuSE/Novell bashing it is really getting annoying to hear such things especially on high profile forums and websites.

Wow what warped dimension do you come from? This deal was announced on the 7th. A grand total of three days ago.

Reply Score: 2

Ask yourself a question.
by Guppetto on Fri 10th Nov 2006 17:18 UTC
Guppetto
Member since:
2005-07-06

I think everyone should ask themselves a question. Before I get to that, remember that OpenSuse is not SLES or Sled, so supporting OpenSuse is still inkeeping with supporting open software. Hoever, SLES and SLED are built upon all the hard work that goes into OpenSuse.

So, ask yourself this question; If the worst case senario were true, would you want to support the foundation for SLES or SLED. Also ask yourself if the agrement was above board, are you really willing to trash your favorite, working just as you want it open source distro, becuase it's now related to the big bad wolf who might huf and puff and blow your house down. If you answer those questions, it will be apparent if OpenSuse is still for you.

Personally, based on what I currently know, I like SLED and OpenSuse 10.2 a little to much to trash it just yet. The time may come for that, but as of now, the party continues.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Ask yourself a question.
by segedunum on Fri 10th Nov 2006 17:32 UTC in reply to "Ask yourself a question."
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

So, ask yourself this question; If the worst case senario were true, would you want to support the foundation for SLES or SLED.

I don't think anyone is doubting that OpenSUSE is a great distribution, and for me it's still the best KDE distro out there. However, what Novell have done is to just throw some FUD at everyone:

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20061109111321376

and this:

http://www.microsoft.com/interop/msnovellcollab/community.mspx

Yes, you read that right there. It's called Microsoft’s Patent Pledge for Individual Contributors to openSUSE.org.

Get that. If you want to know what damage Novell have done you can start right there.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Ask yourself a question.
by dostrowski on Fri 10th Nov 2006 17:49 UTC in reply to "RE: Ask yourself a question."
dostrowski Member since:
2006-11-10

Get that. If you want to know what damage Novell have done you can start right there.

Thank you for the links, the second one, at least, is very insightful, I had not looked at it before.

Interestingly though, I'm not sure I see where it hurts anyone. "Microsoft’s Patent Pledge for Individual Contributors to openSUSE.org" says "we won't weild patents against you if you contribute open source software to openSuSE even if it violates our patents, so long as you don't sue us for patent issues."

But really, folks that write software to be GPL'ed and included in Linux distributions are already kinda banking on that aren't they? Either you write software that doesn't infringe on MS patents and you're home free or you hope like hell they don't weild their patents against you. Up until now, I would say, the false sense of security has been "well IBM and Novell would sue Microsoft's pants off if Microsoft tried to enforce patents on me, so who cares?"

I don't know how this agreement really changes the development model in place.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Ask yourself a question.
by netpython on Fri 10th Nov 2006 18:04 UTC in reply to "Ask yourself a question."
netpython Member since:
2005-07-06

OpenSuse is not SLES or Sled, so supporting OpenSuse

But it's the same frickn firm that's running the scepter.

They signed a convenant with a company whoose headmonkey clearly stated that the ones who sign are not going to be sued.To me that's a threat.Sign or get sued.

Reply Score: 3

Excellent
by Xaero_Vincent on Fri 10th Nov 2006 17:22 UTC
Xaero_Vincent
Member since:
2006-08-18

OpenSUSE is beginning to shape up nicely. Some bugs still need fixing but it looks like everything is under control and RC ready to roll soon.

The Microsoft and Novell deal doesn't change much for openSUSE. I was told that no proprietary software from Microsoft will be added to openSUSE, Mono, so on.

This deal is strictly with SLES and Windows Sever.

Reply Score: 1

A company administrator responds...
by rodda on Fri 10th Nov 2006 18:15 UTC
rodda
Member since:
2006-04-03

I respect Groklaw and the comments of posters here, but I have to ask; how many of you actually install/admin/direct the IT operations at a commercial entity with production servers? While you may despise Microsoft and now Novell, the reality is this; networks are generally heterogeneous because we; the persons responsible for ensuring technology deployments advance the company business objective, utilize the best technology for a given need.

I promote FOSS and even founded the LUG in my town, but it's just not realistic to think that companies such as Novell and Microsoft -won't- enter into contractual agreements. On the surface, it's easy to voice your complaints, but it's much harder to -prove- such agreements are bad for FOSS. Especially since this agreement has been in effect for only a week!

And I -do- consider the history of the companies involved, but thus far, literally everything I've read (from posters and even knowlegable legal types) is conjecture...nothing more.

I do respect the opinions of others, but what if this whole affair turns out to benefit Novell and FOSS? Some of the commenter's I've read recently will look a little foolish for jumping the gun. Heck, even Linus is willing to take a wait and see attitude.

I take the same position as Linus; let's see how it works out. I'm no legal expert, but I doubt any agreement like this will hurt GNU or Linux. That's not to say Novell couldn't be damaged, but the community of FOSS developers and users will not allow GNU & Linux to be thrown out with the bathwater.

If you want to take potshots at Microsoft go ahead, but I think Oracle did more damage to Linux with it's attack on Red Hat than the Novell/Microsoft agreement.

Have a good weekend everyone...

Edited 2006-11-10 18:18

Reply Score: 5

trinitrotolueen Member since:
2006-10-03

because we; the persons responsible for ensuring technology deployments advance the company business objective, utilize the best technology for a given need.

That's your role to say in communication with the field surrounding your portfolio.The company buisiness objective isn't allways in the public interest.It's solely geared towards making profit.So spare me your heterogenous charity babel.

Have a nice weekend.

Reply Score: 2

rodda Member since:
2006-04-03

Tinitrotolueen, I agree: rarely is a pure business objective in the public interest. In my case, I work as the network administrator for a not-for-profit mental health facility (most of our revenue derives from state/federal programs to benefit patients in need). I'm not some person sitting on high spouting the benefits of proprietary software. But the truth is: networks are heterogeneous and combine proprietary and FOSS software.

The agreement signed between Microsoft and Novell also was not done in the public interest. It was done for business objectives. Microsoft made some lame attempt to include verbiage that 'protects Individual Hobbyist Developers'. Yes, it's FUD and Novell should not have allowed Microsoft to include it. But it is useless as Groklaw point out and does not harm FOSS.

I honestly think people are afraid Microsoft now has more power to enforce it's IP. To me, that doesn't fly; no laws have changed. No agreement has been made between the community of FOSS developers and Microsoft.

I hope you understand my position; I don't think this agreement will harm FOSS developers, FOSS software, nor embolden Microsoft to pursue IP claims against FOSS. They have gained no additional 'ammo' because of this agreement. They will proceed with IP claims on their own whim regardless of how we feel about it.

Unfortunately, we -currently- live in a world where software patents are allowed. Until that position is reversed (if ever...and I hope it is reversed), we have to make accommodation's and agreements between commercial entities will continue.

Reply Score: 3

trinitrotolueen Member since:
2006-10-03

I hope you understand my position

I do now.Administrator was being translated literal.
Communication with authorities isn't one of my assets.But that aside.You do make a point in your follow-up.It's not the first time FUD is being launched by MS and CO.Neither do i think MS will be able to hurt FOSS in any way.Although sometimes it's wise to wait and see what happens next in order to evaluate in which directions one and another is heading actually.A healthy dose of procaution never hurts.

Unfortunately, we -currently- live in a world where software patents are allowed. Until that position is reversed (if ever...and I hope it is reversed), we have to make accommodation's and agreements between commercial entities will continue.

Isn't something as FOSS (better yet genuine freedom in the broader context) worth fighting for?And yes the improper use of patents is contra productive to say the least.

We are not that different after all.

Reply Score: 1

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

how many of you actually install/admin/direct the IT operations at a commercial entity with production servers?

Yes, I do.

While you may despise Microsoft and now Novell, the reality is this; networks are generally heterogeneous

Yep. We've had Samba and various other ways for interoperating with Windows and Windows software for years - none of them contributed to by Microsoft incidentally.

I fail to see how this deal can be hailed as a cornerstone of Linux and Windows interoperability when we already have as much Linux and Windows interoperability as we're going to get, and no plans have been laid out by Novell and Microsoft to prove that interoprability will get any better. Read this:

http://www.novell.com/ctoblog/

"Customer will have huge advantages by being able to re-architect their data centers around virtualized solutions built both on Linux and Windows."

Errrr. People have been doing this for years with VMware and one or two other things. No one needed a Novell/Microsoft deal to do it, and Xen is still a long way from running Windows.

but I think Oracle did more damage to Linux with it's attack on Red Hat

Oracle did no damage to Red Hat whatsoever. Oracle are going to have to actually produce a distribution that actually works, and they're going to have to maintain it indefinitely.

Frankly, I think Oracle is more at risk from MySQL and Red Hat using and promoting Postgres than Red Hat is from Oracle producing their own distro.

Reply Score: 5

Jody Member since:
2005-06-30

"Frankly, I think Oracle is more at risk from MySQL and Red Hat using and promoting Postgres than Red Hat is from Oracle producing their own distro."

MySQL and Postgres are not in the same league as Oracle. For smaller projects sure MySQL/Postgres are fine, but for larger/enterprise class stuff they are not really considered alternitaves.

Reply Score: 1

I've figured it out...
by grat on Fri 10th Nov 2006 18:22 UTC
grat
Member since:
2006-02-02

Most people seem incapable of separating "GPL" from "Open Source".

The concept that Novell could be a commercial company, with closed source products, open source products, and support open source, is apparently too much for most people's brains to comprehend.

Is Novell helping the open source community? Yes. Is Novell helping the GPL community? Not as much.

Then again, they're not really hindering it either, since any code they release that's going to be questionable (and I'm not saying they will) will NOT be licensed under the GPL anyway-- again, a concept a lot of people seem to be unable to grasp.

Novell has frequently open sourced a number of projects (Although, they're unlikely to open source their entire portfolio, as some (segednum) would prefer). They're searching for a new business model. Maybe it'll work, maybe it won't.

But boycotting the openSuSE team because their work will later be used by Novell is about as smart as saying you should boycott Fedora because it'll be used by Oracle. It also means you're an idiot, and don't actually "get" open source.

Reply Score: 4

RE: I've figured it out...
by Moochman on Sun 12th Nov 2006 11:21 UTC in reply to "I've figured it out..."
Moochman Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't think you "get" what the consequences of Novell's actions could be (yes, it's hypothesizing, but still...) Novell develops OpenOffice, Xen, and Samba extensions which are non-GPL (also Mono, which is GPL but which is dropped from other distros because of fear about patent infringement). No other distros incorporate these technologies (since they're closed-source or potentially patent-infringing). At the same time, MS modified its formats and protocalls in the next versions to ensure that they're just incompatible enough with earlier versions so that they work with only Suse Linux, and no other distros can interoperate any more. Think about the giant blow to the health of the other Linux distros that this would have. Think about how all of the Linux user base would be forced into using Suse, and how this would be a bad, lock-in situation for Linux as a whole. Nuff said.

Reply Score: 1

let's talk opensuse
by DirtyHarry on Fri 10th Nov 2006 18:34 UTC
DirtyHarry
Member since:
2006-01-31

Please, please let's talk about this release of OpenSUSE in stead of the Novell/MS thingy.

Personally I think that OpenSUSE is one of the best distro's out there (let's forget their mistake with the package stuff...) and I'm looking out for 10.2. I'm also very excited about the effort they've made in integration of OpenSync. Good syncrhonisation is one of the things I'm missing on the Linux desktop, so SUSE go!!!

Reply Score: 5

oh for crying out loud....
by macisaac on Fri 10th Nov 2006 19:06 UTC
macisaac
Member since:
2005-08-28

folks, before novell aquired suse, it was hardly a shining knight of community and open source friendliness. YaST, the most distinguishing bit of the distro, was _not_ GPL for instance. If I remember right, you couldn't even download an ISO for the longest time. Your option if you wanted to try it for free was a horrendous ftp/http install from a mirror server (this before the days of FiOS internet to the home...)

I even sent an email to them once asking if it was ok to make copies of the distro. The answer was ambigious, something about it's alright if you're not charging money, no otherwise (what about if you weren't selling the CDs, but installing it on multiple machines for some client who you would charge for your services?)

Now, Novell aquires them, YaST goes GPL. ISOs made freely available. OpenSUSE project started to broaden community involvement. Not to mention that along with the Ximian folks a lot of new technologies have been developped and released out for anybody to use them if they so choose (mono, xgl, etc.)

I'm not a SUSE/Novell posterboy, but really, this is getting rather annoying to me...

Reply Score: 5

Oh, heated topic
by B. Janssen on Fri 10th Nov 2006 19:17 UTC
B. Janssen
Member since:
2006-10-11

Amazing how people can get so defensive on unestablished matters. It is quite obvious that Novell made an interesting decision, that probably makes sense on some levels. On other levels it is a boneheaded move of unprecedented quality. Somebody at Novell also obviously realized this and switched Novell into damage control mode, allowing third parties to scrutinize their internal papers!

This is good, i have faith in Eben Moglen and his crew to find any ugly truths -- if there are any. And while i share the sentiment that no harm for FOSS will grow from this, i also share the sentiment that i have had no particular reason to recommend Novell over Red Hat before this and now i have even less reasons. I guess Novell just underestimated the emotional and rational bonds of many tech-savvy multipliers to FOSS and thus the backlash.

And to those advocating to talk about OpenSUSE and not Novell/MS: sorry, can't do. The connection is too high to be ignored.

Edited 2006-11-10 19:24

Reply Score: 1

Meanwhile, back in the real world....
by Nezumi on Fri 10th Nov 2006 19:18 UTC
Nezumi
Member since:
2006-04-02

All the posturing that increasingly follows discussion of almost any topic on this site makes no real difference at all. You are not important to Novell or potential purchasers of its services. Deal with it.

I wonder how many of the people who have made comments on this particular topic via OSNews, have done any of the following:

Deployed a Linux solution in the _Enterprise_ space. Note the word Enterprise, not SME or SOHO. Also using a single retired NT4 server for basic SMB sharing doesn't count either. Oh, BTW the PDC/BDC model is now 6 years out of date...

Actually paid a commercial Enterprise Linux provider for goods and/or services. Novell and RedHat are the only companies that personally spring to mind, however I concede this is personal opinion.

Are in a position to alter corporate IT strategy.

Actually contributed code under a FOSS license to a piece of software in use by Novell for their Enterprise offerings.

If you have done any of the above, kindly provide proof if possible. NOTE: abusive rants don't count.

I don't agree with what Novell have done, but understand why they have done it. Nobody (apart from maybe RedHat) is making *real* money from Linux AFAIK. They need a USP. If you don't like the product don't use it. I don't.

BTW, If SuSE works for you then great. What works for me might not work for you...

I don't expect the MS announcement to have any real negative impact on their bottom line. Novell are quite capable of going out of business all by themselves without worrying about the opinions of OSNews readers.

I wonder how many businesses that use Linux in anger actually bother with 'commercial' Linux anyway. Projects like Debian, Gentoo or <insert_favourite_non-commercial_distro_here> seem to be quite capable of excellence without having share-holders or (even worse) marketing departments.


This site reminds me of what /. used to be like a few years ago. The quality of some of the comment here does the FOSS movement a great disservice.

Reply Score: 1

Grub Lizard image
by cole on Fri 10th Nov 2006 19:42 UTC
cole
Member since:
2005-12-31

Does anyone know whether the grub lizard image
http://www.thecodingstudio.com/opensource/linux/screenshots/scaled/...

will be replaced for something similiar to the the 10.1 image
http://debianadmin.com/copper/displayimage.php?pid=499&fullsize=1

for the final release? So it keeps in theme with the rest of the 10.2 loader
http://www.thecodingstudio.com/opensource/linux/screenshots/scaled/...

Edited 2006-11-10 19:44

Reply Score: 2

RE: Grub Lizard image
by suslik on Sat 11th Nov 2006 06:07 UTC in reply to "Grub Lizard image"
suslik Member since:
2005-07-27

Does anyone know whether the grub lizard image.
will be replaced for something similiar to the the 10.1 image
for the final release? So it keeps in theme with the rest of the 10.2 loader

Same thing was in 10.1 betas. They'll put in the actual thing later in the rc cycle.

Reply Score: 1

Food for Thought
by segedunum on Fri 10th Nov 2006 22:45 UTC
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

Again, it's just a great pity that OpenSUSE is getting dragged through this, but Novell have given Microsoft all the ammunition they need there (http://www.microsoft.com/interop/msnovellcollab/community.mspx).

Food for thought is this comment on Groklaw:

http://www.groklaw.net/comment.php?mode=display&sid=200611091113213...

Just why is Microsoft paying Novell that money to Novell again?

Reply Score: 1

OpenSuse
by santana on Fri 10th Nov 2006 22:50 UTC
santana
Member since:
2006-10-22

OK, I have a simple question; do I as an user of OpenSuse also have a MS promise no to sue me (covenant not to sue)? Because all I could find in that FAQs and answers to community is tied to SLED and SLES and non-commercial developers. So, I didn't buy SLED, not SLES, and I'm not a developer, just an user of OpenSuse. What's the statuse with that (OpenSuse includes Samba and OpenOffice which , as far as I can understand are covered with this agreement for SLED and SLES).

Reply Score: 1

re
by deanlinkous on Fri 10th Nov 2006 23:26 UTC
deanlinkous
Member since:
2006-06-19

interoperability improvements made by Novell can, and will, find their way into the linux community, and will do so unencumbered.

How?

The patent covenant only applies to software that you develop at home and keep for yourself; the promises don't extend to others when you distribute. You cannot pass the rights to your downstream recipients, even to the maintainers of larger projects on which your contribution is built...

It's worse than useless, as this empty promise can create a false sense of security. Don't be confused by the illusion of a truce; developers are no safer from Microsoft patents now than they were before. Instead, Microsoft has used this patent pledge to indicate that, in their view, the only good Free Software developer is an isolated, uncompensated, unimportant Free Software developer.

Reply Score: 1

Don't believe the Novell fans
by Don T. Bothers on Fri 10th Nov 2006 23:30 UTC
Don T. Bothers
Member since:
2006-03-15

What does Novell's deal with Microsoft mean to open source? Just look at their closing price and tell me everything is going to be ok.

http://finance.google.com/finance?q=novl

Coincidence... I think not.

Reply Score: 1

Xaero_Vincent Member since:
2006-08-18

After hours:

$6.69

Reply Score: 1

RE: Don't believe the Novell fans
by Mitarai on Sat 11th Nov 2006 01:19 UTC in reply to "Don't believe the Novell fans"
Mitarai Member since:
2005-07-28

Yeah don't believe to Novell fans, believe to the no life trolls, to the FUD spreaders, believe to the anti-Novell trolls, believe to the GPL huggers, believe to the over-passionated nerds, they know.

Reply Score: 0

Back on topic
by Anonymous Penguin on Sat 11th Nov 2006 02:12 UTC
Anonymous Penguin
Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't care about all the arguments going on.

I only wish SUSE 10.2 is going to be faster and less of a resource hog than 10.2

Also I am not going to do any beta testing, because I haven't always found SUSE developers in charge of beta testing particularly friendly.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Back on topic
by Felix on Sat 11th Nov 2006 21:16 UTC in reply to "Back on topic"
Felix Member since:
2005-08-14

> I only wish SUSE 10.2 is going to be faster and less of a resource hog than 10.2

Same here. While Gnome and KDE in openSUSE 10.2 beta2 are very responsive here, the boot time is veeery slow compared to SUSE 10.0. Don't know what slows that much down but one thing I think is ZMD stuff and Beagle which slows starting KDE down.

Have posted a bug report about the slow boot. Let's hope that they get the boot time faster before final. But I'm very satisfied with KDE/Gnome application speed.

> Also I am not going to do any beta testing, because I haven't always found SUSE developers in charge of beta testing particularly friendly.

Have had other experiences. The developers normally reacted on all errors I posted and fixed them.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Back on topic
by segedunum on Sat 11th Nov 2006 22:16 UTC in reply to "Back on topic"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

I only wish SUSE 10.2 is going to be faster and less of a resource hog than 10.2

Surely you mean 10.1?

Well, there's fat chance of that I'm afraid. Beagle sits there running, as well as ZMD, and they both spike CPU and memory usage all over the place. For that reason, I'm still running 10.0 with backport repositories, and I'm very, very happy with it. They should just have left 10.0 as it was technology-wise, and simply gradually improved it.

10.0 was the last good Suse I fear.

Also I am not going to do any beta testing, because I haven't always found SUSE developers in charge of beta testing particularly friendly.

I've seen and heard of such things. They do seem to have a habit of closing bugs before they even get a YOU update out, and that it works, or even before they know what the problem actually is:

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=178321

Edited 2006-11-11 22:16

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Back on topic
by Anonymous Penguin on Sat 11th Nov 2006 22:38 UTC in reply to "RE: Back on topic"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

"Surely you mean 10.1?"

Indeed, that is a typo I realized too late.

"I've seen and heard of such things. They do seem to have a habit of closing bugs before they even get a YOU update out, and that it works, or even before they know what the problem actually is:

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=178321 "

That is almost incredible...

I have also several examples, like once reporting of GRUB bugs and being accused of being unable to install. I have "only" a few thousands installs of Linux and other operating systems behind ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Back on topic
by segedunum on Sun 12th Nov 2006 02:18 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Back on topic"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

That is almost incredible...

Yer. The thing there is that it isn't just an OpenSuse bug - it's a SLES bug too. Surely you can't mark something as fixed until you have code and an update that has been pushed out, and without confirming with your users or customers that it actually works?

QA anyone?

I have also several examples, like once reporting of GRUB bugs and being accused of being unable to install.

I saw one where a bug was filed, and then a developer seemed a bit upset and helpfully pointed out that it isn't spelt OpenSuse or OpenSuSE. It's openSUSE.

Reply Score: 1