Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 15th Feb 2009 14:24 UTC
Debian and its clones A few months later than expected, Debian 5 has finally arrived with a bundle of new goodies: Java is finally in the Debian repositories thanks to IcedTea and OpenJDK; Firefox (rebranded as Iceweasel) is now at 3.0; and official live images are ready for our downloading pleasure. TuxRadar has a detailed look at Lenny along with an explanation from Steve McIntyre, the Debian Project Leader, on why it was delayed. Earlier this week, we already detailed the new features in Lenny.
Order by: Score:
Debian
by jaduncan on Sun 15th Feb 2009 15:16 UTC
jaduncan
Member since:
2005-11-19

Woohoo! That is all I have to say about that. Stability, here I come.

Reply Score: 7

Comment by factotum218
by factotum218 on Sun 15th Feb 2009 16:29 UTC
factotum218
Member since:
2007-03-20

I've been running it for a couple weeks and think it's great. Fast and stable without any problems at all (in KDE 3 anyways).

Reply Score: 3

page 2?
by yahya on Sun 15th Feb 2009 16:51 UTC
yahya
Member since:
2007-03-29

What exactly makes this a "page 2" story?

Reply Score: 8

RE: page 2?
by stestagg on Sun 15th Feb 2009 16:55 UTC in reply to "page 2?"
stestagg Member since:
2006-06-03

No-one wrote a "read more" section for it?

Reply Score: 4

RE: page 2?
by Thom_Holwerda on Sun 15th Feb 2009 17:13 UTC in reply to "page 2?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

What exactly makes this a "page 2" story?


As linked in the item, we already covered the release pretty well and detailed. No need to make the exact same item again two days later.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: page 2?
by flydpnkrtn on Sun 15th Feb 2009 19:29 UTC in reply to "RE: page 2?"
flydpnkrtn Member since:
2009-01-02

As linked in the item, we already covered the release pretty well and detailed. No need to make the exact same item again two days later.


I was wondering the same thing; your explanation makes sense.

No sense in posting redundant posts

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: page 2?
by Adam S on Sun 15th Feb 2009 22:36 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: page 2?"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

I was wondering the same thing; your explanation makes sense.

No sense in posting redundant posts

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: page 2?
by bornagainenguin on Mon 16th Feb 2009 05:09 UTC in reply to "RE: page 2?"
bornagainenguin Member since:
2005-08-07

Thom_Holwerda trolled...

What exactly makes this a "page 2" story?

As linked in the item, we already covered the release pretty well and detailed. No need to make the exact same item again two days later.


Yeah, because Debian is only one of the most recognized and valuable server operating systems in widely in use; no need to have hundreds of stories on it.

[irony]
Ohhhh look!!!111eleventy-one, someone posted on their blog about Windows Seven seems faster than Vista. Quick someone submit it as a front page article!!!!!oneoneone[/sarcasm]

--bornagainpenguin

Edited 2009-02-16 05:10 UTC

Reply Score: 7

RE[2]: page 2?
by Soulbender on Mon 16th Feb 2009 06:01 UTC in reply to "RE: page 2?"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

So I guess you won't post a news item on Windows 7's release day then since you've already covered Windows 7 extensively.

Reply Score: 6

RE[3]: page 2?
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 16th Feb 2009 08:10 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: page 2?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Ah, I see the armchair crowd has joined us? Enjoying that bag of chips, girls?

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: page 2?
by bornagainenguin on Tue 17th Feb 2009 18:10 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: page 2?"
bornagainenguin Member since:
2005-08-07

Thom Holwerda trolled again...

Ah, I see the armchair crowd has joined us? Enjoying that bag of chips, girls?


I just call it as I see it. I'd apologize if the truth is uncomfortable for you, but having one's biases exposed is never fun...so should we expect to see a bunch of Windows Seven coverage on release or will OSNews simply rest on its previous coverage? Tell us, is your consistency only skin deep?

--bornagainpenguin

EDIT - speeling ;)

Edited 2009-02-17 18:14 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Congratulations are in order
by JPisini on Sun 15th Feb 2009 19:23 UTC
JPisini
Member since:
2006-01-24

Congratulations to the whole Debian team.

Reply Score: 3

v RE: Congratulations are in order
by sbergman27 on Sun 15th Feb 2009 19:27 UTC in reply to "Congratulations are in order"
RE[2]: Congratulations are in order
by Adurbe on Sun 15th Feb 2009 22:24 UTC in reply to "RE: Congratulations are in order"
Adurbe Member since:
2005-07-06

software is not obsolete if it works and fulfills its role

Reply Score: 10

testman Member since:
2007-10-15

Windows 3.x worked and fulfilled its role.

Reply Score: 1

s_groening Member since:
2005-12-13

The same truly cannot be said in the present sense ...

Reply Score: 3

rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

Obiviously, because Windows 3.1 isn't in use much anymore.

Vista certainly fulfills in the same way -- for me and millions of others.

Reply Score: 2

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

Vista certainly fulfills in the same way

Back when the '486/66 machines were top of the line, I remember reading a PC Magazine review which commented that there was finally a machine, albeit an expensive one, that could run Windows 3.1 at a reasonable speed. So yes, I guess you could say that Vista fulfills in the same way...

Edited 2009-02-17 19:25 UTC

Reply Score: 2

rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

Funny, Vista runs perfectly well on my three-year old P4 system that set me back all of about $700. If you think that's expensive for a computer, you have issues.

Reply Score: 2

stabbyjones Member since:
2008-04-15

Except the point of stable is that it is tried and tested. Obsolete is just another word for it depending on your point of view. ;)

bring on a new round of testing/sid!

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Congratulations are in order
by alexis on Sun 15th Feb 2009 23:00 UTC in reply to "RE: Congratulations are in order"
alexis Member since:
2007-05-21

can you do it better?

don't be too fast to criticize the debian's team!

congrats guys!

Reply Score: 1

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

don't be too fast to criticize the debian's team!

When I saw your avatar, I couldn't help but think that that woman had just found out the version of GLIBC included. :-0

Edited 2009-02-16 07:21 UTC

Reply Score: 3

da_Chicken Member since:
2006-01-01

I'd guess she's a RedHat fan who was shocked to find out that Debian 5.0 ships with glibc 2.7 while RHEL 5.3 (released in 2009-01-20) only includes glibc 2.5. ;)

Reply Score: 4

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

can you do it better?

By myself? No. Do other distros manage to do it better? Yes.

Reply Score: 3

Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

Not many distros, however, manage to offer over 23,000 packages, 5 DVDs, supporting 12 architectures! (And everything stable and bug-free).

Reply Score: 3

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

Not many distros, however, manage to offer over 23,000 packages, 5 DVDs, supporting 12 architectures! (And everything stable and bug-free).


Your avatar is simply unfair. How can I even presume to stand up to Spock in his prime, in "The Undiscovered Country"?

I've no choice but to concede, darn it! ;-)

Reply Score: 2

Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

"Not many distros, however, manage to offer over 23,000 packages, 5 DVDs, supporting 12 architectures! (And everything stable and bug-free).


Your avatar is simply unfair. How can I even presume to stand up to Spock in his prime, in "The Undiscovered Country"?

I've no choice but to concede, darn it! ;-)
"

LOL!

Reply Score: 2

darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

All of it bug-free? All of it, every single possible usage scenario, with every conceivable combination of hardware and software? I highly doubt it. It may be mostly bug-free, but nothing is ever 100%, completely, utterly bug-free. Never. Never has been, never will be.

Reply Score: 3

Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

Debian releases when the count of release-critical bugs is zero. Thus not your definition of bug-free.
However my experience of comparing Debian to other distros over the years (and mind you, Debian is not the only one I like), is that a Debian release is indeed bug-free for any practical purpose.

Reply Score: 3

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

However my experience of comparing Debian to other distros over the years (and mind you, Debian is not the only one I like), is that a Debian release is indeed bug-free for any practical purpose.

It really does depend upon one's definition of "bug". Say you are running Debian, you go to YouTube, or whatever, and a Flash video won't play because your version of Gnash is not new enough. Or you try to open an ODF document and it doesn't work because your version of Abiword or Gnumeric is too old. Are those bugs? Many would argue that the software was not intended to play that Video, or open those ODF files, so they are not bugs, but simply a lack of particular features. My users would call them a bugs. And I would be hard-pressed to dispute them.

Note that I am not criticizing ODF, here. It's not that ODF is a moving target, but that ODF support in Abiword and Gnunmeric are incomplete "works in progress" at this time. And we all know what a "work in progress" Gnash is.

Edited 2009-02-17 08:03 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Tried and Tested?
by John Blink on Mon 16th Feb 2009 02:39 UTC
John Blink
Member since:
2005-10-11

Does that mean my Canon LBP-1120 printer will work out of the box?

Will I be able to browse my windows shares with ease?

It might be good if stable, but I think these releases should at least make sure basic networking and printing works.

Edited 2009-02-16 02:40 UTC

Reply Score: 0

RE: Tried and Tested?
by RawMustard on Mon 16th Feb 2009 09:37 UTC in reply to "Tried and Tested?"
RawMustard Member since:
2005-10-10

All these things work fine for me and I have five computers in my house running lenny for over a year now!

And you know what? It cost me nothing and does everything I and my kids want for school.

Sure some school stuff was windows only, but I just wrote the principle and told him to change his Luddite attitude and move his kids into the 20th century and now there's no problem. Take control of your life, freedoms, destiny and stop expecting everyone to do everything for you!

A big and sincere Thankyou to all involved with Debian and linux in general, we know the battle is hard and you keep coming through for us year after year. Great jobs guys and gals!

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Tried and Tested?
by John Blink on Mon 16th Feb 2009 11:41 UTC in reply to "RE: Tried and Tested?"
John Blink Member since:
2005-10-11

The computer is my slave, I am not a slave to the computer, I expect the printer to work.

Over the years I have tried to get it to work.(Me being a slave to the computer).

You know what it was painless. I googled found relevant links telling capt this compatible driver that. I did it, it didn't work. I clicked print. Nothing happened. I turned off or reboot the PC, a blank page got fed through the printer.

Why? My programming skills at best is creating a calculator program with complex numbers.

Ahh stuff it, I am not going to type anymore about it.

Edited 2009-02-16 11:43 UTC

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: Tried and Tested?
by phoenix on Mon 16th Feb 2009 18:25 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Tried and Tested?"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

http://www.openprinting.org

Everything you need to know to get printing working in CUPS ... and whether or not it's even worth attempting, based on the printer model.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Tried and Tested?
by John Blink on Mon 16th Feb 2009 23:53 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Tried and Tested?"
John Blink Member since:
2005-10-11

Thanks. I will have a look.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Tried and Tested?
by h3rman on Mon 16th Feb 2009 20:01 UTC in reply to "RE: Tried and Tested?"
h3rman Member since:
2006-08-09

I just wrote the principle and told him to change his Luddite attitude and move his kids into the 20th century and now there's no problem.


:-)

Reply Score: 2