Slashdot Log In
Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 Set for December
Posted by
timothy
on Mon Jul 24, 2006 02:03 PM
from the amazing-project dept.
from the amazing-project dept.
dolson writes sends in a heartening update straight from the Debian project's news page: "The Debian project confirms December 2006 as the date for the next release of its distribution which will be named Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 alias 'etch'. This will be the first official release to include the AMD64 architecture. The distribution will be released synchronously for 11 architectures in total.
At this stage, the upcoming release will ship with Linux 2.6.17 as its default kernel. This kernel will be used across all architectures and on the installer. A later version may be selected during a review in October.
New features of this release include the GNU Compiler Collection 4.1 as default compiler. X.Org will replace XFree86 as implementation of the X Window System X11. Secure APT will add extra security by easily supporting strong cryptography and digital signatures to validate downloaded packages."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 Set for December
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 196 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

OK, but... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:OK, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
And the answer is: yes. K*BSD arches are in good shape, but none of them are release candidates for Etch. Nexenta (OpenSolaris kernel) gathered so much bad karma because of Sun's CDDL's intentional incompatibilities with GPL causing problems that Nexenta isn't going to be an official arch anywhere soon. Debian/Hurd isn't that bad, but too bad, Hurd remains just a toy for now. And Debian/Minix stays at the level of talks for now. It's only Debian/win32 which died completely.
So yeah, Etch does run Linux, but most likely Alien/Lenny/??? (Etch+1) will have K*BSD variants.
Re:OK, but... (Score:4, Funny)
(http://barrett.9hells.org/ | Last Journal: Friday October 06 2006, @09:25PM)
It runs GNU/Linux.
Debian turns me on. (Score:5, Funny)
(http://reverend.healeys.net/)
Just in time for Christmas (Score:5, Funny)
(http://lurch.is-a-geek.com/)
process (Score:3, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Saturday March 03 2007, @04:33AM)
Re:process (Score:5, Insightful)
Or an outdated product, as I've come to realize. I have a rented server running Debian, which has given me nothing but headaches because some of the packages are horribly outdated, namely PHP5. I mean, PHP 5 is what, over two years old now, how come they didn't think it was stable nor tested? This is one of the reasons why the next server I rent will be running something else. Better to have "untested" (use that word carefully) stuff working than no stuff at all. Must be that "security-through-obsolence" paradigm rearing its head
Re:process (Score:4, Insightful)
It's just a matter of priorities, really. There's a balance to be struck between having the newest stuff and having a stable distribution. The stable branch of Debian just balances its priorities very strongly towards stability. It's up to the user to decide whether that's what they want from their operating system. If not, there is other branches of Debian, and other distributions entirely, which can be used. Allowing wild variation in philosophy like this is one of the redeeming features of the "distro soup" that exists.
Re:process (Score:5, Informative)
Re:process (Score:4, Insightful)
You can do this if you like, I guess, although I would feel a little uncomfortable: My rule is "stable whenever it matters to someone else". I use testing on my own machines, but I've definitely found myself in situations where testing was broken (usually just due to large upgrades like libc6 or something, but still, more broken than I wanted to deal with) -- or, if the whole archive isn't broken, you can still get upgrades forced on you that change the behavior of the system in unpredictable ways and make you unhappy. Generally, the increased stability of "stable" is worth it to me and my users when I'm doing any sort of administration.
It's useful to note that in the uncommon-but-not-rare case where you or a user wants a package upgrade from testing or later, you can very easily use apt to pull down the source and build-dep, compile it for your system and install it as a package with very little hassle. Do this for the packages where it matters, and you have a mostly stable system with the features you need.
Re:process (Score:5, Informative)
(http://www.mithrandir.net/)
Debian running current software? (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Tuesday November 26 2002, @07:28PM)
I'm impressed.
Re:Debian running current software? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Debian running current software? (Score:4, Insightful)
Architectures. (Score:2, Funny)
(http://www.roadflares.org/matt)
--saint
Re:Architectures. (Score:5, Informative)
(http://unixclan.no-ip.org/ | Last Journal: Wednesday December 27 2006, @12:59PM)
I also run Debian on PA-RISC for my shell server. [no-ip.org] Add an account for yourself and do a few apt-cache searches to see which packages are available. All the major desktop and server packages are there (various apache mods, firefox, gaim, amule, etc). I found Debian to provide more modern software then HP-UX or BSD for PA-RISC. Even most of the somewhat obscure Debain provided applications are available. I run Debian and Ubuntu on x86, OpenBSD and Solaris on SPARC64 (Solaris is better for SMP systems), IRIX and Debian on MIPS (IRIX is better for newer Sgis like the Octane2), and HP-UX and Debian on PA-RISC. Overall I've found Debian to be the most portable complete Operating Environment. I have not used NetBSD that much so I am not aware of it's current state. It has a reputation for portability, but seams to lag behind in terms of real world testing (many of the ports apparently consist of cross compiling code), and also doesn't seem to have as many packages as Debian. Overall it just looks less up to date then Debian or OpenBSD.
Preview Release (Score:5, Funny)
(with apologies to the debian developers... I couldn't resist)
Re:Preview Release (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.chemicalfusion.net/)
I'd used Debian before, but not a lot, probably around GNOME 2.6 and lower. That all certainly wasn't there. Then, I decided to fire up VMWare and install Debian Etch just to see how things are moving. It was practically Ubuntu without the splash screen and Add/Remove Programs in the Applications menu.
Now, granted, I know that is certainly not the only thing the folks at Ubuntu have been up to, but it goes to show that Ubuntu isn't the only one making progress in the Linux world. Debian is still chugging along, faster than ever it looks to me, and Ubuntu is benefitting from that more than anyone.
Re:Preview Release (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://ouij.livejournal.com/)
Flamebait, pure and simple. Listen up, Debianistas: the only hard and fast requirements are encoded in the licenses under which software is released. So, comrades, point to me how the ubuntu project (or any of the other Debian daughters, like, say Xandros) violate the terms of the licenses under which software in the Debian project is released?
How about "Not at all?" Take your bitterness, compact it into a pill, and swallow that.
The whole Debian/Ubuntu internecine bitchfest reminds me a lot of the communists I knew on campus--the Maoist faction couldn't even be seen with the Stalinist faction. Did anybody but them care? No. But I'm sure they had a lot of fun in their respective cell meetings, counting the meagre takings of their pamphlet sales (which had to be on alternate days, lest they have to share space with the traitors from the other side)
Re:Preview Release (Score:4, Informative)
(http://www.chemicalfusion.net/)
I'm an avid Ubuntu user, and I've been using it since Warty Warthhog. It's been my primary OS on my notebook since a bit into the Preview releases of Dapper Drake.
I love Ubuntu, and while I used to recommend Fedora Core, Ubuntu is all I recommend these days. However, I'm simply acknowledging the hard work the Debian team does. They're both great distros, but Debian lacks the Desktop polish I like in Ubuntu. Little things, like a splash screen and the community support is second to none.
I also know that Ubuntu contributes back to the community, and it does to a great job on hardware support, hence the "Ubuntu Hardware Database." My laptop has never run Linux so well since Dapper Drake was installed.
Ubuntu gets two thumbs up from me, and my post was 100% NOT flamebait.
Re:Preview Release (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://ouij.livejournal.com/)
If Ubuntu has violated no license or broken no law, then would people do us the great favour of shutting the fuck up already? Goodwill is not enforceable. It may be desireable, but it is not a necessary condition for progress in the Free Software ecosystem. Is it just me, or is the Debian project moving a LOT faster now that the Debian Daughter Distributions--Ubuntu included!--have vastly expanded the pool of developers, testers and users?
We don't have to like each other. But it would be nice if we could appreciate what we mean to each other collectively.
Why? (Score:5, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Monday August 16 2004, @09:50AM)
I wonder if Ubuntu has got something to do with it...
How many years passed between debian 3.0 and 3.1? The changes were big, and now in so much less time a whole number (4.0) gets released.
What are the differences besides using a recent kernel for the first time?
3.1 is the new 4.0 (Score:5, Interesting)
Merry X(windows)mas (Score:4, Funny)
hahahahaha (Score:1, Funny)
Oh, you'rs serious???!!!!!
Nah, I'm just joking. I'm a debian user. I believe you.
Finally (Score:3, Funny)
(http://easyvpshost.com/ | Last Journal: Friday August 26 2005, @06:58PM)
after mucking around With all those new desktop distros out there it will be refreshing to go back to good ole debian.
(Don"t give me that crap about apt-pinning, I know what it is, but I prefer simple apt-get freshness)
is there an election or something? (Score:5, Funny)
-math
Re:is there an election or something? (Score:5, Funny)
Improved install? (Score:2)
(http://trollchat.org/)
Re:Improved install? (Score:4, Informative)
Big improvements (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://phorm.phormix.com/ | Last Journal: Monday May 19 2003, @12:08PM)
However, all-in-all I've found that running Debian/testing has gone pretty well, and Debian/stable+backports has worked pretty well too. I'll be looking forward to when the features in testing happily merge back into stable.
Oh, and hopefully the rather-cool FPS Nexuiz [nexiuz.com] will merge into stable as well, as it's pretty impressive to see something like that ending up open-source and available in the standard repositories (it's available in testing [debian.org]+ right now). It's also the first OSS app that's really given my graphics card a run for its money.
Is it Etchy Eft or Efty Etch? (Score:3, Funny)
(Last Journal: Tuesday September 25, @06:21PM)
Will this include biarch support? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Will this include biarch support? (Score:4, Informative)
If I understand correctly, it will not be ready for etch (4.0), but the following stable release seems likely to have it.
Newer GCC than Gentoo stable (Score:5, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Friday August 17, @08:29AM)
(Seriously, I run Gentoo unstable, but I've deliberately taken measures to avoid upgrading to GCC 4 - still not worth it IMO, at least until I can be sure most software will actually build successfully with it.)
The exact release date for etch (Score:4, Funny)
(http://www.sfsouthpaw.org/)
The relase cycle is speedy! (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://serios.net/)
At least when compared to MS. Three Debian releases between XP and Vista. And people say Debian is a slow mover.
Well, at least assuming that both "Etch" and Vista will hold their target dates... Is this a too bold assumption to make? Perhaps.
Are we losing rock solidness? (Score:1)
Debian should have been the rock solid stable distro that can sit in a server with least maintenance to do against other distro who often break things, update configuration file structure suddenly and change the behaviour of an application than put only security patches back ported.
Sure, getting 2.6 kernel makes many SATA and whatnot to work, but who was making the release cycle? Why did 3.1 take so long and why is 4.0 coming out so soon with massive changes?
I'm starting to doubt Debian would keep up being the most stable solid for use with servers distro.
I mean, a serious network server doesn't need any X for sake, which means all Fedora and whatnot are just out of my way, when it comes to using them as real serving purposes. Now what should I use when Debian starts to be Ubuntu catch up distro? I would go back to some BSD sacrificing performance for the sake of better security model and less maintenance cost.
Printing in Debian (Score:2)
So Etch would not be the first Debian that ships with a broken print subsystem.
a release? (Score:1)
(http://www.bizzeh.com/)
Secure APT! (Score:2)
(http://www.thief.net/)
Heh WHO KNOWS but at least apt secure is finally making it into the stable version. I am wondering if its only checking the Release.gpg or if the
At least they notice they get hacked and release the information that this has happened. Unlike what any company driven distro would be doing.
December... (Score:1)
Re:Welcome (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Welcome (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Welcome (Score:5, Informative)
An "emerge -pve kde" shows a total source code download of 541,705 kB atm (For a KDE 3.5.2/Xorg 7 environment).
There are fewer packages for KDE in the Gentoo portage tree but thats because it's much more monolithic, there is however a modular set of packages for KDE. Either way the downoad size is almost the same, and i'd say their just as bad as one another to maintain.
I haven't run into many GTK apps that require Gnome libraries except maybe libgnomeui (provides additional widgets I think), which is small.
So quit trolling and think up something better than "make a poo proud" next time.
Re:Welcome (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Welcome (Score:1)
Re:Welcome (Score:2)
If Debian want amd64 support they better do so ;-)
Re:kernel (Score:4, Informative)
I don't know if you are trolling or not, but I'll bite
As explained in this pdf file about the debian kernel here [vergenet.net], they remove non-free drivers. I understand why they do it, but I could see where it would be annoying if your hardware was effected. Here is a quote from the pdf:
On a related note, I sometimes get the feeling that they don't spend as much time polishing some of the rough edges off the kernel the way the Redhat people do with kernel patches and backports. But that is probably to be expected since they are (i'm guessing) mostly volunteers and not paid (like I'm sure the redhat engineers are). Regardless, I'm not looking a gift-horse in the mouth and I am thankful for their efforts. I'm a happy debian-stable user and look forward to etch.
Re:Can we also have... (Score:2)
Re:Can we also have... (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, the plans for 2.2 migration speak about having 2.2 as a replacement instead of putting it side-to-side, so no, Etch probably won't have that Apache 2.0 you want.
MySQL 5.0 was released in October 2005, Sarge in June 2005. So...?
Re:Can we also have... (Score:2)
(http://robots.org.uk/)
3.1
$ apt-cache policy apache2
apache2:
Installed: 2.0.54-5
Candidate: 2.0.54-5
Version table:
*** 2.0.54-5 0
540 http://ftp.nl.debian.org sarge/main Packages
540 http://security.debian.org sarge/updates/main Packages
100
Didn't PHP 5.0 come out <strong>after</strong> Debian 3.1 ("sarge") was released? Nevertheless, packages are available from <http://backports.org/>.
Re:The user Debian folks didn't seem to happy (Score:1)