Submitted by Opera 9.22 has been released; mostly a bugfix and security release. “We released 9.22 today and it’s a recommended security update. There are changelogs for Windows, Macintosh, and Linux/UNIX. Bit Torrent also received some nice improvements, so it should be quite a bit faster now.”
I don’t understand why the people at opera refuse to update the repository at http://deb.opera.com when new versions are released. It really sucks when doing updates The Right Way(tm) gets you treated like a second class citizen.
And how hard can it be to make ubuntu dist entries in addition to the debian ones? C’mon!
I guess I’ll just have to manually copy new opera versions to my own repository so that my friends won’t be equally mistreated. (This isn’t quite legal, but if opera software gives me the finger I might as well given them the finger, too.)
Edited 2007-07-19 21:27
If you were a Windows user, you wouldn’t have these repository headaches.
> If you were a Windows user, you wouldn’t have these
> repository headaches.
Huh? If I was on windows I’d have to do it the hard way (i.e. manually downloading and installing). I can just as easily do it that way on linux, too. It’s just that on linux (well, at least on ubuntu and debian) there is also a better way in addition to the way you have to do it on windows.
actualy windows users have it faily easy. in opera go to “help” and then “check for update”….. after all that hard work your fingers are going to be tired…. you should probly take a break from working so hard and do something simple like compile things
.
(this being said as a joke from a fellow linux user)
Edited 2007-07-19 21:51
You’re right that it’s an inconvenience to “do it the hard way” by downloading and manually installing the update, but come on! I just did it on Ubuntu and it tool me like, 20 seconds, instead of the, I dunno, 15 seconds it’d take on Windows. Big deal!
> it’s an inconvenience to “do it the hard way” by
> downloading and manually installing the update, but
> come on! I just did it on Ubuntu and it tool me like,
> 20 seconds
Still, opera has a deb repository, so why can’t some guy at opera spend 20 seconds updating that repo so that thousands of people wouldn’t have to spend 20 seconds each manually upgrading opera? Or even better, automate the whole process so that nobody will have to spend any seconds on it.
Maybe because they don’t want to overload their servers?
> Maybe because they don’t want to overload their servers?
Oh, c’mon! The number of people using deb.opera.com is a very small fraction of the total number of downloads.
If the main point with automatic updates is to get all the newest security fixes then why would they delay a security fix release only for people with automatic updates?
The repo is not on the same server as the manually downloadable files, so if they are going to update the deb repository anyway at some point then the same potential overload will happen anyway (except if most deb.opera.com users have already upgraded manually, but then there’d be no point for having a deb repo if people aren’t using it).
As I said, there’s no proper reason for having a deb repo that’s not up-to-date.
If I was on windows I’d have to do it the hard way (i.e. manually downloading and installing).
LOL, if this is the hard way, you shouldn’t use a computer to start off. No to mention the real hard way, that is on Linux where you have to either open the terminal and type some code, or search for the repository, add the line to the list of repositories, open Synaptic, search for the application and install, and most of the time it doesn’t work as expected, or a dependency is not found. Gimme a break…
If you were a Windows user, you wouldn’t have the ability to update all of your software (aside from Opera) at once from a central location
I don’t care about having to update everything at the same time. On Linux there’s always that update icon says there are new updates. I always leave it red. I update if and when I want. And what’s the benefit of a central location? I thought you were against monopoly. I don’t get it.
If you were a Windows user, you wouldn’t have the ability to update all of your software (aside from Opera) at once from a central location
Fixed that for you.
Seriously, I doubt many Debian/Ubuntu users are going to trade apt for the ability to download and run an Opera .exe instead of downloading and running dpkg -i on an Opera .deb.
Given that there are 365 different linux distributions on distro watch ALONE, with at least THREE major packaging methods and quirks that have to be coded around for every major distro… Be thankful they at least BOTHER to give you a targeted .deb instead of telling you to just build from source. Frankly given the sheer volumn of distribution methods and targets needed for linux, I’m surprised they even put in that much effort on it.
What, you thought the near total lack of commercial grade software under linux was due to closed vs. open source? Try absurd number of target kernels, absurd number of target distros and absurd number of distribution methods.
At least you aren’t using alien to try and get an RPM to work because that’s the only method they package it. There’s a reason I have high hopes for a common API to wrap them all and simplify distribution as proposed by the LSB back in January.
Edited 2007-07-20 00:44
Off-topic:
I’m sure its being discussed further up the forum, There are a lot of Distributions becuase GNU is a vibrant successful marketplace, with specialist distributions that run on old machines; multimedia applications, games, router, firewalls.
A distribution is essentially what someone considers an ideal package. You can argue that no choice *is* better than no choice, but as we have seen from the Microsoft world, your not offered a choice, just increasingly crippled versions.
Why shouldn’t their be a choice of package managers, kernels, file managers etc The best technology will win out, and each will have a Desktop that addresses their need.
I could go on but its in another thread, its off topic, and those that love opera are being denied the opportunity to rave about another successful release.
Boo hoo.
it took me about 20 seconds to install the new
version a la mala. it is not that hard to install it
“the hard way”! linux users should not have any problem with this….i hope.
> it is not that hard to install it “the hard way”!
> linux users should not have any problem with this
Of course they don’t. You’re missing the point, as are mikesname and deathshadow. (I suspect you know this very well and are just flamebaiting.)
The point is that opera software provides opera at deb.opera.com except that it’s now outdated for no proper reason. They should either keep deb.opera.com up-to-date with the download page (at least for security updates like this one), or shut it down completely.
You stopped any serious discussion right here:
“if opera software gives me the finger I might as well given them the finger, too.”
That’s what I call flamebaiting. But that might just be me.
Anyway, I’ll pull up the lame good ol’ reason. They’re still serving you a security update for a free browser. If it’s too much to bear that they’re not updating the repo right away, and you NEED to whine about it on a public forum, you need a vacation, without ‘net access.
Sorry
> They’re still serving you a security update for a free
> browser.
Well, I have given them monetary compensation and I don’t require anything more than courtesy in return.
> If it’s too much to bear that they’re not updating
> the repo right away[…]
They claim that 9.22 is a recommended security update, yet won’t even have one person spend the 30 seconds or so updating the repo. Apparently they don’t recommend it very much.
What’s worse, though, is the false sense of reliability. If they don’t want to have a deb repo then fine, don’t. Just don’t have one and then not put “recommended security updates” there, possibly making those vulnerable who think they can count on opera’s deb repo. Or at the very least put a warning on http://deb.opera.com saying that the repo is not actively maintained and might be outdated and thus should not be relied upon.
It would be nice to have this built for Debian, or any Debian based distro.
Another great side effect; I can now use Opera with Blogger.
Oh, Solaris x86 works nicely, it would be good if they released a dynamic rather than having to use a static build.
What a pity that there is 17 posts whinging about minor installation inconveniences yet nobody has commented on the application itself nor the security or stability updates this revision offers.
Problem is that there’s nothing to comment – Opera is just enough stable and secure for me. 9.22 is minor update anyway – nothing new here. Just browse, don’t whine
I’m not interested in making schroot configured just to comment on how nice or well standards supported Opera 9.22 has become since I run amd64 linux kernel.
opera:plugins shows that the SWF beta plugin (labs.adobe.com, 20070611) is found, but no page like youtube.com containing Flash content is working. I did not test any further since this is number 1 test case that is required to work. Java plugin is working.
If you want a deb package go download it from the website they have the latest stuff right there for ubuntu, debian, etc…
http://www.opera.com/download/
Edited 2007-07-23 05:55
> If you want a deb package go download it from the website
Huh? Nobody has claimed that they don’t have debs. On the contrary, people (like me) have noticed that they DO have debs, yet they DO NOT put those on THEIR deb repo.