Submitted by The fourth pre-release of Mandriva Linux 2008 Spring is here. This pre-release includes the all-new artwork for the 2008 Spring release, further improvements to the Mandriva software management tools, WPA-EAP support in the network configuration tools, KDE 3.5.9 and available 4.0.1, some new default applications in KDE and GNOME, and the latest pre-release of OpenOffice.org 2.4. See here for download information. And URPMI got support for rpm5.
I know it’s shallow and easily changed, but the default look of the Mandriva releases leaves a lot to be desired. I was using 2008 on a spare machine I had kicking around for a couple months and everything was just awesome…except the artwork. If they can spruce that up a bit and bring it more in line with the polish the big three have (Ubuntu, Fedora and openSuse), then they have a real winner on their hands.
I’m sorry but if you’re holding up Ubuntu’s default artwork, which hasn’t changed significantly since 5.10 and is by many accounts “butt ugly”, as something Mandriva should aspire to, then you’re seriously out of touch with aesthetics. Mandriva’s default themes have always been revolutionary, whether users favor them or not. At least they’re not afraid to try something new with each release; unlike Ubuntu. Even with Hardy Heron, the Ubuntu devs have found some excuse to stick with the same ol same ol.
Edited 2008-03-02 13:03 UTC
While it is true that Ubuntu’s current theme has been in service for a long time (well, about a year and a half, two years counting the upcoming version), I have a small correction to make: Ubuntu’s ‘Human’ theme has existed since Ubuntu 6.06, not Ubuntu 5.10, which only had a brown Clearlooks colorscheme and the default GNOME icon set.
If by “Human” you mean the point at which they switched to orange icons and the Ubuntulooks GTK engine, you’re right of course. Those did arrive with 6.06. I’m referring to the overall brown look (wallpaper, default color scheme, etc.) that has indeed been with Ubuntu since its inception with only small tweaks made here and there with each new version. Take a look at Google images for screenshots of the very first Ubuntu release up to the current 7.10 release. You’ll be hard pressed to spot anything significantly different by taking just a passing glance. I expect more from Ubuntu, frankly. With another LTS release looming, they’ve really missed an opportunity to present something truly spectacular on the surface to match the innovation under the hood.
Well, I see that as branding. Ubuntu is brown and brown is Ubuntu. When you see those brown desktops in a Google search, you know that those are Ubuntu desktops. It is recognised, and they cultivate that brand recognition.
They could, of course, do something keeping the colours but changing other things, like the the theme engine, or the icons, or the panels (which they have done). I, personally, would like that they kept the colours because they help giving the distribution identity, something desirable in a ‘market’ as diverse as that of Linux distributions
And please forgive any broken English found in this message. I try to keep it within the bounds of sanitary regulations
Love it or hate it… Ubuntu’s choice of color scheme was daring. I’m no graphic artist, but twenty-eight years of sitting in front of computer monitors has taught me that brown is probably the most variable color there is when it comes to different monitors, display cards, and lighting conditions. It can look very good. But then change the lighting a bit, and you’ve got baby feces as your background image. And even when it looks good, brown still has that unfortunate association with solid waste.
I like the Ubuntu theme alright. But I would not be averse to them switching to, say, green. Green is a nice, warm positive sort of “feel good” color. It suggests “nature”. And it is easier to get right on a variety of displays.
As an aside, I note that cmost managed, as usual, to get his usual anti-Ubuntu comment in, under this thread about a completely different distro.
I just downloaded this release again. I love the new taskbar. I don’t know what else to say. The best of the best of the best of the best!! Rating? 10/10. This is *it*. This is *the* Linux desktop. Even my Sony Ericcson W810 gets detected when plugged in for both the memory card and the phone memory. Guess what, Windows XP requires some type of special “USB Flash” driver in order to use your W810 phone as a USB flash disk. With Mandriva, I plugged at in and it worked. (It shows a digital camera icon on the taskbar but that’s not a problem). This has got the power to take on Vista without a doubt. It’s using KDE 3.x (with an option of 4.x) and it’s packed with features. Well done Mandriva.
Edited 2008-03-02 04:27 UTC
I take it that you liked Mandriva then ?
Fixed spelling mistake
Edited 2008-03-02 10:44 UTC
I clicked “Report” on your post instead of “Reply” by accident
Lucky we have that “Cancel” option.
Yes, I like Mandriva Linux, settings are where you expect them to be, the fonts are sharp and the whole system is responsive. Of course I do have suggestions for the “Install & Remove Software”. One of these suggestions would be adding an option for “Select All” in the group. For instance, when you want to install a different desktop environment, the scroll list is huge and for almost every package it asks you whether you want to install the dependencies. So you have to keep pressing Ok, click on the next check box, press Ok for installaing the dependenies again, then click Ok again it asks you again and again and again, my wrist gets tired. There should be a setting like “Yes to All” or “Remember my answer for all for this session” etc
Edit: I also noticed that streaming Windows Media doesn’t quite work as it requires the “HTTP Protocol Source Plugin” which is not installed – as displayed by Totem.
Edit: It’s working with Kaffeine but in its own window (not embeded). This means, I had to view the source, get the URL, an asx file and paste it in Kaffeine but a Joe user will not know this. Just a thought for the final version…and also, my /dev/sda1 – NTFS from Storage Media is still unaccessible where my FreeAgent drive which is NTFS works fine. There is a padlock icon in /Media/hd (which points to /dev/sda1, NTFS, Windows XP). I assume it has to do something with the permissions or group privilliges. I have only one hard drive and it’s SATA.
Edited 2008-03-02 11:16 UTC
Thanks for the compliments.
RPMdrake already has a select all button – bottom left of the window, under the category list. Also, we have metapackages for installing things like complete desktop environments. To install GNOME, install task-gnome. To install KDE, install task-kde. To install KDE 4, install task-kde4. To install XFCE, install task-xfce. Easy, no?
On the other thing, I’m going to take a new approach to the question.
Imagine if we could somehow implement a special system which hid source code tarballs from anyone but distribution developers.
Amazing! Your problem is solved!
Now it’s really easy for anyone to install any available software on their Linux distribution of choice.
Oh, sure, the available range of software just went down…about 3%. But it’s still more than enough for just about everyone.
Basically: if you don’t know what you’re doing with source tarballs, and you’re not comfortable with learning, then *they’re not supposed to be for you*. Linux works on repositories, that’s just the way it is.
Yes, a usable ‘universal’ package system is extremely difficult. The problem is not the package format, that has nothing to do with it. The problem is that distributions are different, simple as that.
Thanks for that!
Install the kaffeine and win32codecs from the plf repository and you will be given a much improved version of kaffeine, one which Mandriva cannot ship for legal reasons, as it provides both encoding and decoding capabilities for all kinds of codecs.
Well, seems that Linux distro are really getting the desktop-way but one more time there’s an issue that prevent the mass adoption of Linux: The diversity of package managers (deb,rpm suse,rpm rh, rpm mandriva, ebuild..)!
The Problem:
Let’s assume that i use Mandriva and i want to install the package fooXYZ:
1)If there’s no .rpm for Mandriva 2008 i need:
2) Ask for a obscure repository (check google for long hours)
3) Build from source which creates more problems for Joe user:
3.1) Joe user don’t read INSTALL ou README
3.2) He tries the typical ./configure;make;make install but it fails..he needs the the fooLib1.2 and configure script says that only fooLib1.1 is available!Google..it fails again because fooLibPlugin1.4..Google…and he gives up.
3.3) There’s no fooXYZ installed. -1 for Linux!
4) If there’s a RPM, let’s pray that is Mandriva 2008 version, if not..ok back to step 3)
5)If step 3) is successful how the Joe user is gonna uninstall fooXYZ that Joe doesn’t like the GUI?
That’s a PITA for Joe User, probably he will gave up and back to Windows XP Next,Next,Finish process that *works* and more..he can uninstall by clicking Add/Remove.
Ok, you can say that if the package is in repository is even easier to install than in XP. It’s true but i think that package makers should be the provider/company of software that knows better the software than other people..
This all options of package formats prevent software company’s build a single binary that works on every distro.
The Solution:
1) Autopackage is a good start, but its outdated.
2) Please check how .DMG from MACOSX is built.
It’s so difficult to create a STANDARD for install a damn package?
How do you think about this?
Since most distros come with just about every app “joe User” needs then they dont need to look for a rpm. It’s only the same as trying to find the exe, they still have to spend time looking for it and hope it’s the right one(Windows/OS X both warn about downloaded content).
Windows has no such repos and nether does OS X so your going on the word of what they say when you download, Linux repos are checked and secure(unless you go for third party which is a small risk).
Edited 2008-03-02 13:33 UTC
In general, I agree with you. But, since Linux is about choice, no standard packaging format has emerged (no pun intended) and different distros have developed their own ways of doing things. I have high hopes for such things as Klik, Autopackage and even ‘Click ‘n Run’ as they offer more universal ways of installing popular software across different distributions. I do disagree that software installation on Windows or Macintosh is somehow better. It’s different, but not necessarily better. Linux distributions’ repositories are chuck full of every package most users would need and in most cases they’re only a mouse-click or two away when using the distro’s package manager. Installing packages this way is far more reliable (and secure) than downloading and installing individual packages as is done on Mac or Windows.
The solution is to use a distro based on DEB.
Then, if you are extremely unlucky enough to find an application that has no DEB, use the excellent application ALIEN.
Alien will convert an RPM and all its dependencies into a DEB for you to use with your favourite package manager.
And why is that? What makes a deb based repo superior to rpm?
Popular Linux Mythology.
To a great extent, that’s true. It took some Debian users several years to come to terms with the fact that other distros had adopted package manager. And even today, one still hears unsupported claims of something called ‘RPM Hell’ whatever that might be.
But… there are some practical advantages that deb based distros have compared to rpm based ones.
Package availability for deb based distros is typically sterling. Debian and Ubuntu have something like 19000 – 20000+ packages available. Compare that to Fedora, which has about 9000-10000 available. And that actually does make a difference in the real world. There have been plenty of times where a package I wanted to use was just an apt-get away on my deb based machines, but rather more difficult to locate for my rpm based ones. It used to be that certain out of repo proprietary packages came as rpm or tgz only. But the rise of Ubuntu pretty much put an end to that.
Also, apt *is* very noticeably faster. It’s faster at processing the metadata, and it almost always has superior download speeds. I believe it can pull from multiple servers at once. YUM is also a bit clunky. It has more issues with database corruption, requiring an rpm –rebuilddb. I sometimes have to force kill it. And I sometimes have to fiddle with lock files.
And that clunkyness extends to pirut. Synaptic is much nicer.
On the other hand, yum is steadily getting better. And I look forward to delta RPMs actually becoming useful, in practical way, in Fedora 9. Which is nice, because I still generally prefer Fedora to deb based distros. Depending upon the situation, of course.
Remember this thread is about Mandriva. Mandriva has around 17,000 binary packages, 9,000 source packages. urpmi and rpmdrake perform very well, especially in this new release.
But… there are some practical advantages that deb based distros have compared to rpm based ones.
Package availability for deb based distros is typically sterling. Debian and Ubuntu have something like 19000 – 20000+ packages available.
—–
Have you looked at packages available in the Mandriva repos? They are comparable to the Debian/Ubuntu repos. Also, isn’t it considered bad to mix Debian repos with Ubuntu repos?
There have been plenty of times where a package I wanted to use was just an apt-get away on my deb based machines, but rather more difficult to locate for my rpm based ones. It used to be that certain out of repo proprietary packages came as rpm or tgz only. But the rise of Ubuntu pretty much put an end to that.
—
you forgot that Mandriva is probably the only big rpm distro thas has used urpmi as a standard from the beginning. Fedora has something new almost every release and the less said about SuSE the better.
Also, apt *is* very noticeably faster. It’s faster at processing the metadata, and it almost always has superior download speeds. I believe it can pull from multiple servers at once. YUM is also a bit clunky. It has more issues with database corruption, requiring an rpm –rebuilddb. I sometimes have to force kill it. And I sometimes have to fiddle with lock files.
—
Again, please also look at urpmi. I hold it in high regard.
Edited 2008-03-02 20:23 UTC
Thank you for the feedback. But Mandrake/Mandriva is not really on my radar anymore. Repeated poor experiences with distro QA and Mandrake Store, plus a general distaste for the current Mandriva management prevent Mandriva from appearing on my “Distros I care about” list, and likely will for a continued very long time.
Regarding the mixing of Debian and Ubuntu repos, the standard repos that come enabled in current a current Ubuntu release represent over 20,000 packages all by themselves.
Edited 2008-03-02 20:33 UTC
“Thank you for the feedback. But Mandrake/Mandriva is not really on my radar anymore.”
So…what are you doing posting argumentative stuff in a thread about a Mandriva pre-release?
That’s a fair question. And you’ll have to read up the thread a ways to see why I originally posted. Gireesh was kind enough to make some suggestions and I replied honestly, based upon my past experience with Mandrake. I originally happened onto this thread via the “recent conversations” panel, in which a post about the relative advantages and disadvantages of deb and rpm based distros caught my eye. Having used both extensively in both personal and professional situations, I felt I had something of value to add to that conversation.
Well, I’d say your comments really aren’t “rpm vs. deb” per se, then, but Fedora vs. Debian. Which isn’t terribly relevant to this discussion. The amount of packages available in a distro’s repositories is a function of the distribution, not the packaging system it uses; so is the speed of its high-level package management applications (there is nothing intrinsic about deb and rpm in themselves that affects the speed of apt-get, synaptic, urpmi, rpmdrake, yum and so on). So you can’t really make general “rpm vs deb” comments based on one rpm-based distro and one deb-based distro, as you’re evaluating the distros, not the package formats.
Would you have preferred that I make some stuff up about Mandriva? 😉 As I mentioned before, I don’t use it. However, since my curiosity has been piqued, I just did a random spot check of some packages that I am interested in currently:
Django
Turbogears
Pylons
Cakephp
Ubuntu’s out-of-the-box repos have all of them. Fedora’s have Django and Turbogears. Mandriva appears only to have Django, if I am reading it right. I looked here:
http://mirrors.kernel.org/mandrake/Mandrakelinux/official/current/i…
Can you point out some packages which Mandriva has which are hard to find for a deb based distro?
I don’t mean to come off as anti-rpm. But it’s going to take some concrete evidence to convince me that Mandriva package availability is as good as for Debian or Ubuntu.
Addendum: Right after I posted this, I noticed a response in another thread suggesting I try out the “eric” editor for Ruby and Python. Ubuntu has it. Fedora has it. Mandriva does not seem to. Again assuming that I’m looking in the right place in the link above.
Edited 2008-03-03 02:26 UTC
for the package eric,here is what rpmdrake says is available on my 2008.0 box
Version: 4.0.1-2mdv2008.0
Architecture: noarch
Size: 18359 KB
Medium: Contrib (Official2008.0-8)
note the medium, it says contrib. You only looked in the main repository.
As for django, it is there as python-django
Version: 0.96-1mdv2008.0
Architecture: noarch
Size: 7570 KB
Medium: Main (Official2008.0-4)
turbogears,pylons and cakephp are not available, but you can request them and I am sure they will be added.
But while we are at it, does Ubuntu have Metisse packaged?
Edited 2008-03-03 03:09 UTC
Really? Forgive me for being a bit skeptical about it being that easy.
Unknown. I’ll let you know if I ever have a valid need to turn a window sideways.
But if it isn’t, you can request them and I am sure they will be added. 🙂
LOL!
Oerr, you asked the question
“Can you point out some packages which Mandriva has which are hard to find for a deb based distro?” and
I showed you an example of one. I do not have the need for CakePHP, Pylons or Turbogear either. Or for that matter Metisse.
You’re only checking main, but Mandriva has two other repositories, contrib and non-free.
As it happens, the things you listed (which all seem to be obscure – i.e., I never heard of ’em before
– web development frameworks) are not in these repositories either, but eric is (it’s in contrib).
I don’t know what package would be in Mandriva but not other distros, apart from the obvious (Mandriva tools). It’s not a question that keeps me awake at night. Generally Mandriva includes packages for most things most people want, in my experience, and that’s the important thing.
For the things you listed, you could file a new package suggestion at http://bugzilla.mandriva.com/ , but it would depend on there being someone interested in packaging every web development framework in town
.
I don’t argue that overall Debian has slightly more packages than any other distro, but Mandriva is not that far behind, and it’s further ahead of Fedora than it is behind Debian.
10,000 is just the official repository. thats not including aptrpm,dribble,livna,fresh or any other repo’s. which will be included in fedora 9 under the fusion umbrella i believe. Yes Debian has more packages but many of those packages are network scripts from 1998 or perl modules only 20 people use. I haven’t had to compile anything in my fedora box yet. in my download folder my rpm and src folders are completly empty. I’m just so use to creating them but haven’t had to download not even one package yet not in yum. Even had a repo for mozilla beta 4 which i thought for sure id have to compile. instead it installed firefox 3 alongside ff2 without having to replace it.
I pretty much agree with the rest of your comments. Yums file locking needs to stop although the speed is very fast to me. a yum -y update takes 3 seconds on average. if debian/ubuntu do it in 1 second kudu’s to them but im not in THAT big of a hurry where 2 seconds will ruin my day. maybe you’d like to look up the fast mirror RPM? yum install yum-fastestmirror.noarch
Did I say it was superior ?
I merely showed that people who use DEB based distros have the capability of converting RPM using alien.
There is no such tool for people on RPM distros
And for good reason. Installing packages from other distributions is not a good idea, no matter what format they’re in. Frankly I think Alien is intrinsically irresponsible as it merely encourages people to do something they shouldn’t: install packages from other distros. It’s a *good* thing there’s no automated .deb -> .rpm converter, and I hope no-one writes one.
Alien is a last resort, not a good solution, but it’s better than nothing, and easier than compiling something from source… so alien does adress the problem when there’s no package for your distro that you can easily install one from another distro.
alien -d
It can also convert deb to rpm, now I am confused!
Heh, I didn’t know that. Interesting. I stand by my comment above that that’s a *bad* thing, though. Installing packages from other distributions only leads to trouble.
Stop whining about non-existent problems.
Two easy choices.
1) Easy Urpmi:
http://easyurpmi.zarb.org/
2) Klik (very similar to the Mac’s self-contained packages).
http://klik.atekon.de/
The klik client comes preinstalled in many distributions already.
Find better things to complain about, because package management really isn’t the real issue.
This is the DUMBEST argument I’ve heard (not calling parent dumb, just the idea contained in the post).
So you switch back to Windows (XP, vista whatever). Then to use the SAME analogy you used – you want some piece of software that doesn’t have an installer (or package) for your version of windows.
What are you going to do?
I think I’ll take the linux package option.
If there’s no package for mandriva, try one for just about any of the major current distros and it should work fairly well (thanks to LSB). Otherwise contact the project maintainer and see if they are happy to provide mandriva packages (or whatever distro you are running).
In any case, you can convert between the different package managers very easily these days.
And my final point is that sure you can switch to windows but if this package you need so badly is not available for mandriva, it DEFINITELY wont be available on windows. So good luck buying all the software you get for free with Linux. Meanwhile I’ll pay off my mortgage with the same money…
where is kdelibs-devel?
You want task-kde-devel (for KDE 3) or task-kde4-devel (for KDE 4).
Thanks for that 😉
I heard, via Beranger, that an Xfce spin is in the works for the next Mandriva release. Adam, can you fill us in on the status of this spin with regards to the RC’s and final release? Thanks.
Patrick
Patrick: we’ve wanted to do one for a while, but in the end haven’t had time to work on it. Situation’s same for 2008 Spring, as far as I know: if we have the time to spare, we’ll do an XFCE One disc (or if someone in the community builds one and it works well, we’ll provide it as a community build). XFCE itself in Mandriva is well maintained and very polished, but building a live CD is an extra step on top of that. If I get more definite info I’ll let you know.