This is the second update of Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 (codename ‘woody’) which mainly adds security updates to the stable release, along with a few corrections of serious bugs. Those who frequently update from security.debian.org won’t have to update many packages and most updates from security.debian.org are included in this update. Please note that this update does not produce a new version of Debian 3.0 but only adds a few updated packages to it. There is no need to throw away 3.0 CDs but only to update against ftp.debian.org after an installation to incorporate those late changes.
Debian GNU/Linux 3.0r2 Released
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Whenever gluck is online again, then you should be able to slipstream your R2 onto your existing ISO image.
Why does Debian still use the 2.2.20 kernel?
There are newer kernel images and sources you can download and compile.
2.2 kernels are still considered by many as more stable than 2.4 kernels. However, Debian does realize that people may want some of the newer stuff, so you have a choice between 2.2 and 2.4.
First, what does it matter?
Second, you don’t mean Debian. You mean Debian GNU/Linux Woody. This because Debian GNU/KNetBSD doesn’t even use the Linux kernel and Debian GNU/Hurd doesn’t either. Also, this topic is about Woody.
Third, because one can use another one very easily.
Try this in Woody: $ apt-cache search source | grep kernel
[…]
kernel-source-2.2.20 – Linux kernel source for version 2.2.20
kernel-source-2.4.17 – Linux kernel source for version 2.4.17
kernel-source-2.4.18 – Linux kernel source for version 2.4.18
[…]
Or this $ apt-cache search image | grep kernel
[…]
kernel-headers-2.4.18-bf2.4 – Headers for Linux kernel version 2.4.18 (bf variant) on 386
kernel-image-2.2.20 – Linux kernel binary image for version 2.2.20.
kernel-image-2.2.20-compact – Linux kernel binary image.
kernel-image-2.2.20-idepci – Linux kernel binary image.
kernel-image-2.4.18-1-386 – Linux kernel image for version 2.4.18 on 386.
kernel-image-2.4.18-1-586tsc – Linux kernel image for version 2.4.18 on Pentium-Classic.
kernel-image-2.4.18-1-686 – Linux kernel image 2.4.18 on PPro/Celeron/PII/PIII/PIV.
kernel-image-2.4.18-1-686-smp – Linux kernel image 2.4.18 on PPro/Celeron/PII/PIII/PIV SMP.
kernel-image-2.4.18-1-k6 – Linux kernel image for version 2.4.18 on AMD K6/K6-II/K6-III
kernel-image-2.4.18-1-k7 – Linux kernel image for version 2.4.18 on AMD K7
kernel-image-2.4.18-bf2.4 – Linux kernel image for version 2.4.18 (bf variant) on 386.
[…]
Actually, one can use the 2.4-bf floppies to use a 2.4 kernel during install and install a 2.4 kernel (2.4.18 + patches).
One can also easily install new versions.
Sid even contains 2.6.0-test9 and 2.4.22. Wouldn’t surprise me when Sarge has some newer versions than Woody, too.
“First, what does it matter? ”
My mouse and keyboard apparently dont work in the 2.2.xx series.
BTW thanx for the tip 🙂
What kind of type keyboard/mouse? You sure it works with 2.4.xx? When
I assume you want to install on a i386.
Check this out:
Section 4.2.2 @ http://www.de.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/ch-install-methods.en…
Section 11.2.3.* @ http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/ch-appendix
Latest GNOME/KDE for Woody (3rd party) @ http://people.brad-x.com/~diamondc/debianinstall.html
(lists.debian.org and people.debian.org are currently down)
Or search for such @ http://www.apt-get.org
“Why does Debian still use the 2.2.20 kernel?”
They use 2.2 because the distro is so old that 2.2 was the kernel around when 3.0 came out. A year or so from now when the next major upgrade from Debian comes out it will again be outdated as all of the other distros will be on 2.6 by then. Also unfortunately Debian is a least another 2 years away from having an official moron proof GUI installer like all of the other distros. Some people like to say Debian is just ultra conservative and that can make it stable. I just say it uses old software, and that dragging around a bunch or architectures nobody uses is really really dumb. To each his own though I suppose.
“They use 2.2 because the distro is so old that 2.2 was the kernel around when 3.0 came out.”
True, regarding Debian GNU/Linux Stable/Woody, which isn’t bleeding edge and is tested quite a lot more than say Gentoo’s Stable. Therefore, perfect on servers.
“A year or so from now when the next major upgrade from Debian comes out it will again be outdated as all of the other distros will be on 2.6 by then.”
Can you get yourself a pair of glasses? One can actually use 2.4.x on Woody using official packages and/or installers.
“Also unfortunately Debian is a least another 2 years away from having an official moron proof GUI installer like all of the other distros.”
The Sarge installer will get better, and Progeny is porting Anaconda to .deb-based distributions.
If you don’t like it, i’m afraid Debian isn’t for you however you can get yourself one of the many GNU/Linux distributions which are based on Debian GNU/Linux. Both commercial and non-commercial exist. Examples: Libranet, Lycoris, Progeny and Knoppix, Gnoppix, Morphix – among others. Check for example distrowatch.com
“Some people like to say Debian is just ultra conservative and that can make it stable. I just say it uses old software”
What’s wrong with that? If it ain’t broken, don’t fix it. Debian is done by volunteers with little financial backup, in contrast to say SuSE and RedHat. You can also check out Sarge for more bleeding edge or even Sid. You have choice!
“and that dragging around a bunch or architectures nobody uses is really really dumb.”
I think you insult a lot people by naming them nobody. I suspect you do not like NetBSD either? I suspect you wouldn’t want to run Linux on ie. your satelite receiver (MIPS, PPC)? Totally useless, yeah. Totally useless running Debian GNU/Linux on your old SPARC. Nobody uses it, in fact it’s all developed using i386 which is the only good architecture…
“To each his own though I suppose.”
Indeed!
False, 2.4 was out when Debian 3.0 came out.
The installer is quite old yes, but it’s the most functional OS installer I’ve ever used. It’s not hard to use if you just READ THE TEXT ON THE SCREEN.
As for the architectures no one really uses. I use Debian/Alpha, and am quite thankful that the Debian team keeps the port nice and recent for me.
…I can’t believe people post without knowing the basic facts!
Virtually every story I’ve seen regarding Debian releases does nothing but complain about old software, so let’s make this clear right now.
Debian has FOUR different branches.
STABLE: This is what this story is about. This is the release of Debian Stable 3.0. This means that the software here has been run through just about any gauntlet you can throw at it and passed. It’s rock-solid, and ideal for mission-critical applications. Unfortunately, to satisfy the rock-solid criteria, it must be a bit dated by neccessity.
TESTING; A step up from stable, but not by much. This is software being considered for inclusion into the stable branch. Look for software that’s a bit more modern, but not too much.
UNSTABLE: The bread-and-butter of most desktop users. This is the one that’s so similar to Fedora it’s scary. Packages hit the apt repositories within a few days of release. I’m running unstable ATM with Gnome 2.4.1, Gstreamer 0.64, etc…
EXPERIMENTAL: I’ve never dabbled in this, but the name says it all. Pre-unstable packages, freshly rolled with a smaller group playing with them. The purpose of this branch is to make sure software isn’t seriously broken before it’s put into unstable.
So there you have it. For everyone who doesn’t want to do research, there’s the quick version. You’re welcome.
Second, you don’t mean Debian. You mean Debian GNU/Linux Woody. This because Debian GNU/KNetBSD doesn’t even use the Linux kernel and Debian GNU/Hurd doesn’t either. Also, this topic is about Woody.
Check the name of the thread, it was pretty obvious that he was talking of that specific distro… More than 95% people talking of Debian are refering to their Linux distro. I hope you’re not in a purist crusade like all those elitist assholes wanting to correct anyone that are saying Linux instead of the so-holy-and-important GNU/Linux.
>> Some people like to say Debian is just ultra conservative
>> and that can make it stable.
That’s the truth. I do not see what’s the problem with it, Debian is still GNU/Linux, that guarantees you the freedom of installing another kernel version.
>> I just say it uses old software, and that dragging around
>> a bunch or architectures nobody uses is really really
>> dumb.
That’s because you do not have any machine using any of those architectures, but for those who do (like me) Debian infuses new life to those machines.
I laugh a lot when I see people bashing things based upon their own assumptions of a perfect world.
That’s simply childish
Do you really thing that people waste their time packaging and creating Debian versions of other architectures just for the pleasure of it????
By the way, one of the big strenghts of Linux is it availability for so many platforms.
Whenever Debian GNU/Linux is mentioned in a forum such as this, many posters bash Debian as being “outdated” and having “old software”. As others have pointed out in this discussion, it is simply not true. Debian’s “unstable” (perhaps a misnomer?) branch has software that is quite up-to-date, and is just as stable as any other distro running up-to-date software.
For me personally, having the newest software is not a major concern. I have older hardware (an AMD k6-2 450 and a P3 800) and a slow dialup connection. I don’t want to buy a CD every few weeks or perform downloads all night long just to have the newest software. I like the fact that my Debian 3.0 “Woody” came with all the software I wanted on CD. That frees me to enjoy using my system, and I only download major bugfixes and security updates. When the next major stable release of Debian comes out, I’ll buy the CD’s and upgrade to the new release with apt and then start tracking the bugfixes and security updates again.
A lot of people mention “getting off the upgrade treadmill” as a reason for ditching MS Windows. If that is the case, why do most Linux discussions seem to focus on having the most up-to-date software and constantly upgrading? Today’s up-to-date software is just tomorrow’s old stuff.
“Check the name of the thread, it was pretty obvious that he was talking of that specific distro… More than 95% people talking of Debian are refering to their Linux distro.”
The reason i named it that way, is to make a distinction; providing choice. I don’t care what the majority does when their logic is incorrect. The distribution is called Debian GNU/Linux. Za. Dot. Finito. No discussion possible. It seems then, according to your numbers, that 95% of the people name ”Debian” incorrect, while Debian GNU/KNetBSD and Debian GNU/Hurd show the Debian system is independant of the Linux kernel and glibc. THAT is the reason, nothing ”elite”, nothing ”cool” or whatever you thought.
Gentoo Linux, RedHat Linux OTOH are names, and i don’t add GNU there for a purpose: they’re names. They chose not to name GNU, while in the beginning of Debian, Debian chose to add GNU in their OS leading the name to Debian GNU/Linux.
“I hope you’re not in a purist crusade like all those elitist assholes wanting to correct anyone that are saying Linux instead of the so-holy-and-important GNU/Linux.”
I’m not elite, nor asshole. Just a human, like you.
Second, i name the OS GNU/Linux. My choice. If i type a post, i type it correct from my point of view. You have a problem with the fact i type my post in my way?
GNU had actually about nothing to do with my whole post
Now, bye.
The easiest thing to do is when you boot the Debian Woody CD, at the boot prompt, enter “bf24” (without the quotes), and Woody will be installed with a 2.4.x kernel (2.4.28, actually).