Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Debian Software Linux

Debian GNU/Linux 5.0 "Lenny" Released 386

Posted by kdawson
from the waiting's-over dept.
Alexander "Tolimar" Reichle-Schmehl writes "The Debian Project is pleased to announce the official release of Debian GNU/Linux version 5.0 (codenamed Lenny) after 22 months of constant development. With 12 supported computer architectures, more than 23,000 packages built from over 12,000 source packages and 63 languages for the new graphical installer, this release sets new records, once again. Software available in 5.0 includes Linux 2.6.26, KDE 3.5.10, Gnome 2.22.2, X.Org 7.3, OpenOffice.org 2.4.1, GIMP 2.4.7, Iceweasel 3.0.6, Apache 2.2.9, Xen 3.2.1 and GCC 4.3.2. Other notable features are X autoconfiguring itself, full read-write support for NTFS, Java programs in the main repository and a single Blu-Ray disc installation media. You can get the ISOs via bittorrent. The Debian Project also wishes to announce that this release is dedicated to Thiemo Seufer, a Debian Developer who died on December 26th, 2008 in a tragic car accident. As a valuable member of the Debian Project, he will be sorely missed."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Debian GNU/Linux 5.0 "Lenny" Released

Comments Filter:
  • by nicc777 (614519) on Sunday February 15, 2009 @06:48AM (#26862103) Homepage Journal
    Still KDE 3.5 - so perhaps this will be the KDE user's distro of choice?
  • by nutshell42 (557890) on Sunday February 15, 2009 @07:40AM (#26862309) Journal
    Honestly, if you're the kind of guy who uses Debian stable you certainly will stay with KDE 3.5 until at least 4.5.

    Good to see that in the time of bleeding edge releases-every-6-months distros there's still a choice that actually allows you to get work done.

  • by novakyu (636495) <novakyu@member.fsf.org> on Sunday February 15, 2009 @07:53AM (#26862369) Homepage

    Etch just looked longer because *a lot* of improvements to the GNU/Linux was being made during that time in terms of the kernel hardware support and the desktop stuff, and whoever was using Debian stable during that time couldn't take advantage of those developments.

    They always had the option to go "testing", which is surprisingly stable, compared to other GNU/Linux distros or, God forbid, Windows. The only downside is that the security patches usually come first to the stable release.

  • Re:Blu-Ray? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 0100010001010011 (652467) on Sunday February 15, 2009 @08:05AM (#26862403)

    Don't forget the 'best' install out there: NetInstall [debian.org]. Unless you actually want to download 31 CDs or 5 DVDs worth of stuff. The best part about Debian is the mix and match of installing what I want. I honestly can't fathom trying to download 20Gigs of stuff just to make a desktop unless I plan on installing in middle of nowhere.

  • by zsau (266209) <(slashdot) (at) (thecartographers.net)> on Sunday February 15, 2009 @08:05AM (#26862407) Homepage Journal

    Screenshots of Debian? I can't think of anything more useless. You might as well try taking photos of life-forms there's such a huge range. No-one but me has a computer that looks+works the way mine does. (Albeit I've changed the feel more than the look, so any non-Gnome Crux screenshot will be reasonably close.)

  • by Trepidity (597) <delirium-slashdot&hackish,org> on Sunday February 15, 2009 @08:18AM (#26862441)

    Unstable is unstable in the sense of changes happening semi-frequently, which you may not want on your production servers. But if your primary problem with Debian stable is that it doesn't get new software often enough, then presumably changes happening semi-frequently is precisely what you do want. And it gets bugfixes and security fixes first.

    Despite the name, it's not where totally crazy experimental stuff that is more-likely-broken-than-not happens. There's a separate area, aptly named "experimental", for those packages. For example, the xf86->xorg change was staged in experimental for several months before being pushed to unstable after getting put into pretty good shape. OpenOffice 3 is undergoing a similar process currently, and will presumably be in good shape by the time it gets into unstable.

    There is admittedly sometimes breakage in unstable, usually of specific packages, just because it's the newest widely used distribution: something'll never get to testing if it breaks in unstable. You can avoid even that, unless you really are the first person ever to encounter a particular bug, by using apt-listbugs to warn you of packages with major bugs filed against them, and delay upgrading those.

  • by GF678 (1453005) on Sunday February 15, 2009 @08:31AM (#26862495)

    Just reading this (Note I am not a Debian User anymore) has me noticing just how much the quality is in the FOSS field compared to MicroSuck, Adobemedia and any other company that's just in it for the money and not the technical perfection. Despite all marketing gibberish to the contrary.

    I really wish people would stop with this bullshit. You mention Adobe - GIMP doesn't even compare to Photoshop. Technical perfection is useless if it doesn't give people enough of what it wants.

    Now that this is out of the way, grats to the Debian team for a fine release.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 15, 2009 @08:42AM (#26862531)

    The Debian KDE team would love any help people can give, perhaps from Kubuntu guys!

    I hope not. I'm have used kubuntu since 0606 and been happy about it and recommended it to everybody. But I stayed on 0804 with still has kde 3.5, and now I'm looking for an alternative distro.

    It's not the KDE4. I think it at least will be great now with 4.2, but (almost) all the extras that kubuntu put in are gone. No GUI to adjust the clock, no GUI to set up your screens etc.

  • OT question ... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jopet (538074) on Sunday February 15, 2009 @09:05AM (#26862605) Journal

    will there ever be a way to watch blue-ray movies legally on a Linux computer?
    I have been using Linux on my desktop for years now, but I am getting increasingly frustrated with the lack of drivers for all the things that get more and more "normal" in the Windows world: synchronizing mobile phones, loading maps into a GPS device, playing Blue-ray disks, operating TV-cards, security devices (e.g. chip-card readers) and other special hardware.
    So it is not only a lack of game playing software or professional graphics software like Photoshop ... it is simlply a major *effort* for the average user to ignore or work around all these problems.
    And it seems for some of these problems there are major legal or other obstacles which I cannot see getting solved in the future.
    Opinions?

  • Re:FHS 2.3? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 15, 2009 @09:54AM (#26862829)

    unfortunately FHS is ambigous on the issues..

    http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#LIBESSENTIALSHAREDLIBRARIESANDKERN [pathname.com]

    > The /lib directory contains those shared library images needed to boot the system and run the commands in the root filesystem, ie. by binaries in /bin and /sbin

    Thus, if your /bin contains amd64 binaries needed to boot the system, you should put the amd64 libs in /lib.

    FHS is built on assumption that the 32bit userland is the default and only selected binaries (databases, and others who really need 64bit pointers) are 64-bit - which is true for the older 64bit archs.

    but lib64 is stupid idea in the first place.

    It should be more generic: /usr/lib/$(arch)/

    Thus you could support as many 32 and 64bit architectures as your cpu (and kernel) supports (and the rest via emulation).

    http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=387446 [debian.org]

  • by harry666t (1062422) <harry666t&gmail,com> on Sunday February 15, 2009 @09:55AM (#26862835)
    Huh? I've switched from Intrepid to Lenny on my laptop two months ago because Gnome 2.24 had broken session management (or rather: none at all), KDE 4.x had broken everything else, and KDE 3.x was ported... poorly. Debian is great for tracking the latest, newest, hottest NON-BROKEN versions of stuff. Sorry, I'm using my computer to do WORK, and a working computer is MUCH more valuable than a computer with a GUI with a higher version number in an "about" box.

    Each time I try out some other distro, I eventually come back to Debian. And Debian will always forgive me and welcome me like a good, old friend. Debian, I love you.
  • Re:OT question ... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Hatta (162192) on Sunday February 15, 2009 @10:02AM (#26862871) Journal

    There's no legal way to do many worthwhile things in this world. Don't worry about it. You're here to live your life, not obey laws.

  • Re:Blu-Ray? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by harry666t (1062422) <harry666t&gmail,com> on Sunday February 15, 2009 @10:05AM (#26862883)
    That's how things look like on YOUR side. Now put yourself in the role of a maintainer of a mirror. Bandwidth costs money, and mirroring a Linux distro usually is something you do voluntarily.
  • by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Sunday February 15, 2009 @10:12AM (#26862937) Homepage Journal

    I don't want to give Microsoft free defense or anything, but that's because Windows XP was getting better over that time and still ran all the new software. Debian Sarge stayed trapped in antiquity for eons and was helplessly behind the times. I think that was the time when the community decided that Debian was a server OS, and that someone else would have to provide a desktop Debian.

  • Re:Blu-Ray? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Sunday February 15, 2009 @10:42AM (#26863111) Homepage Journal

    It is not going to be in the archives because it would waste a huge amount of space. You may build it yourself using jigdo.

    So what you're saying is that they are doing their best to prevent it?

    (Maybe the thing has changed substantially, but last time I tried to use jigdo I actually ended up using a different Linux in protest.)

  • by heffrey (229704) on Sunday February 15, 2009 @10:51AM (#26863145)

    The bug was introduced September 2006 and fixed in May 2008. I think there were many very troubling issues relating to this bug that everyone who is works on and relies on OSS should be concerned about. The main point, in my view, is the lack of process. This is a bug that was introduced by the downstream packagers of OpenSSL. So, the distro supplies something that you think is OpenSSL, but in reality it isn't. It's the downstream packagers' version of OpenSSL. I'm afraid any trust evaporates at that point.

  • by VampireByte (447578) on Sunday February 15, 2009 @11:04AM (#26863229) Homepage

    Ever heard of doing apt-get after a minimal install? This isn't windoze where you have to take everything or nothing.

  • Re:OT question ... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Sunday February 15, 2009 @11:33AM (#26863387) Homepage Journal

    I think I was not bitching but asking a question. The problem is that I would love to buy (yes buy) stuff with Linux support - problem is, that it often simply does not even exist.

    Please name a product you have been searching for, where you cannot find something which suits your needs which has Linux support.

    My original question was exactly about one of the things I would consider to be of major importance: the ability to play blue-ray movies on the desktop. As far as I can see there is no legal way whatsoever to do this on Linux and there is no legal way in sight either.

    My point was that this is a result of the legal manouverings of the people behind Blu-Ray. If you buy Blu-Ray then you are voting with your dollars for standards which make interoperability difficult or even impossible. You have no one but yourself to blame.

    At some point you have to decide if you have principles or not. Clearly, you do not believe in the ability to play purchased media on Open Source platforms if you actually spend money on Blu-Ray discs. There's no third way, and I wish people would stop pretending there is.

    I guess my point is that these are serious problems for making Linux more common for a broader user-base and I would love to see constructive ideas how to deal with them instead of ignoring the problem, routinely putting the blame on hardware companies and disregarding anyone who raises the issue as a troll.

    Obviously you don't understand that the world is capitalistic, and/or don't understand how capitalism works.

    The only vote that you have that matters is how you spend your dollars. Whether that's what products you choose to buy (or not) or whether you elect to pay your taxes (or not) or activities you choose to engage in (or not) due to their tax situation... it's all based on money. The entire world (yes, China too) works on the principle that what makes you more money is good. Therefore if you choose to spend money on closed standards, the world will provide you with more closed standards, because obviously there is money in them. If you choose to spend money on a shitty movie or a crappy album just because it's a member of your chosen genre or put out by someone whose other work you like, you are voting for them to make more shit. Do you see how this works? By the same token, if you buy a Blu-Ray disc when it is difficult to play on Linux, you are voting for making it difficult to play media on Linux. And at some point you have to take personal responsibility. You have to make the decision to only support media which is delivered on your terms.

    Different people have chosen to achieve this goal in different ways. For some, they make the decision to engage in civil disobedience by using a program whose use is actually proscribed by law in their jurisdiction to play the media that they've paid for. I am unaware of anyone actually ever being arrested for playing a DVD or Blu-Ray disc that they actually purchased on an unlicensed device, and do not believe that laws should be followed simply because they exist. I am skeptical that you actually follow every law in effect where you live, and in any case if you have not memorized the code you can't be sure, so I am not clear as to the precise nature of your objection.

    Anyway, by the same token, following the DMCA is equivalent to voting for it. Don't obey unless you aim to be a slave. Yes, it is risky to disobey. Yes, you have an obligation to disobey an unjust law. Let me just go ahead and terminate this thread by invoking Godwin here by saying that "just following orders" is not and never has been a valid excuse for supporting tyranny.

  • by QCompson (675963) on Sunday February 15, 2009 @12:53PM (#26863931)

    Unlike everyone who is bitching and moaning, I read the notes about how KDE 4.0 was just a preview, do not use, do not install on production machines, etc ... so I continued to use KDE 3.5 until 4.2 came out.

    Oh you mean these http://www.kde.org/announcements/4.0/ [kde.org] release notes? Where it says nothing about 4.0 being a preview or not installing on production machines?

    Nice try, but it's not easy to rewrite history that soon. I'm sure the KDE devs appreciate your efforts though. IMO KDE4.2 still isn't ready for use on production machines anyway.

  • by RAMMS+EIN (578166) on Sunday February 15, 2009 @01:15PM (#26864089) Homepage Journal

    ``I wonder what the fetishism is with Debian stable ...''

    It's one of the few releases for which a real effort is made to get all show-stopping bugs out one way or another. That's an enormous feat for a distribution that includes not only a complete operating system, but also more application software than any distribution I've compared it to.

    Sadly, both etch and lenny have been released with known release critical bugs. These bugs have not affected me, but I am still concerned that Debian is inching away from "release only when ready" towards "release with bugs if necessary to make the release date". I don't want that to happen; there are enough distributions that do this already!

  • by jonadab (583620) on Sunday February 15, 2009 @01:45PM (#26864297) Homepage Journal
    > > One would think so. After all, proprietary operating systems
    > > sometimes go twice that long between service packs.
    > But they aren't tied to the software they run so tightly.

    Debian isn't that way because of anything Debian does wrong. It's that way because when application developers put out a new version of anything for Linux, they typically make it *require* the absolute latest version of every library it uses, which effectively means it won't run on an operating system that's more than a couple of months old.

    It isn't just that there aren't ready-to-install packages. You can't install the latest Firefox on Debian etch even if you're willing to go to the trouble to compile it yourself, because it requires a newer version of GTK than the one in Debian. Bear in mind, GTK is the main widget set, the thing used to draw windows and scrollbars and checkboxes and so on in the graphical operating environment (Gnome). That's NOT something you're ever going to upgrade independently of the operating system (and even if you wanted to, you generally can't because the new version of GTK probably requires the absolute latest versions of twelve other things, and so on; when you get to the end of the chain, you probably find out that libc or something requires a more recent kernel than your system is based on). New versions of applications *SHOULD* support three-year-old versions of GTK. But they almost never do.

    And if it's not GTK it's libc or glibc or some other basic part of the platform API. Again, new versions of applications *SHOULD* support three-year-old versions of these libraries, but the almost never do. I don't happen to know which library is (or which libraries are) the holdup for Subversion, but if it were possible to just compile it for etch, somebody would have done so, and the package would be available -- probably not from the official Debian etch repositories, but from backports or somewhere. If it's not available at all for Debian stable, it's almost certainly because it won't compile, because it requires a hyper-recent version of some library or another. And that's NOT the platform or distribution's fault. That's the application developer's fault.

    Now, when the curmudgeonly sysadmin insists on running oldstable for months and months after the new stable release comes out, that's arguably a different matter. In that case, you don't necessarily expect new versions of application software to work. Although, on other platforms (e.g., Windows, or Mac OS X for that matter), you still would.
  • Re:OT question ... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 15, 2009 @01:49PM (#26864319)

    About GPS: I received a Tomtom for a Christmas present, noting the lack of support for a GNU/Linux client, I contacted the company. Apparently a GNU/Linux client *is* in development.

    If you want to help get GNU/Linux support on the Tomtom, ring their sales line and ask if their GPS work with GNU/Linux. It can only help the cause!

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 15, 2009 @02:41PM (#26864669)

    The Debian developer asked on the openssl-dev list about his patch. He even pointed out the potential problem with his patch, but was unsure about its entire ramification. He was seeking guidance about it from the openssl developers and was told to go ahead it if it helps with debugging. If the openssl developer, who is the most knowledgeable about the code he works on, had bothered for more than a second to think about the potential problem with the patch, and had communicated his concerns to the Debian developer, the whole thing could have been avoided. Openssl developers screwed up by not giving proper guidance, period. They are just as culpable.

  • by grumbel (592662) <grumbel@gmx.de> on Sunday February 15, 2009 @03:03PM (#26864787) Homepage

    Openssl developers screwed up by not giving proper guidance, period.

    It is not the job of the OpenSSL developers to babysit Debian people that don't know what the fuck they are doing. And its especially not Debian jobs to fiddle in code that they don't have a clue about. If the Debian people think their patch is useful, they should have submitted it upstream for proper review and wait till it got applied to the upstream branch, not casually asking on the mailing list and then just moving ahead with applying a debugging hack to a production software.

    All that aside however, the very simple fact that this patch never got a proper review from other Debian people nicely illustrates that security in Debian is something that mostly works by blind luck, not by well thought out procedure.

  • by ultrabot (200914) on Sunday February 15, 2009 @03:25PM (#26864919)

    Debian testing is far more stable than Ubuntu and is regularly updated.

    Debian testing and Ubuntu are both based on Debian unstable. It takes a while for testing to become "debian stable", and it also takes a while before Ubuntu becomes a "release". Moreover, it takes a while for an Ubuntu LTS release to get better - but if you give Ubuntu LTS some time to mature, it will prove to be extremely solid (this is what happened with Hardy), while still delivering relatively recent packages.

  • by mcubed (556032) on Sunday February 15, 2009 @04:26PM (#26865253) Homepage

    Generally speaking, it's a good idea to use the nicknames in your /etc/apt/sources.list, rather than the generic names. So use "lenny," "squeeze," "sid," rather than "stable," "testing," "unstable." That way you won't be surprised by a release.

    Though, really, Debian releases are so few and far between, it's a pretty infrequent "surprise."

    Check the release notes in advance of upgrading to be aware of potential issues. If you just change your current list from "stable" to "etch," you won't have any of the new stable flowing into your system. Etch will be supported with security updates for another year.

  • by jetxee (940811) on Sunday February 15, 2009 @05:11PM (#26865469) Journal

    Try openSUSE (and use this link to get all the media codecs with one click). Try Fedora. Try Mandriva Heck, try Slackware.

    A linux without apt-get? No way! Not once again!

  • Re:Eternal Lands (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 16, 2009 @12:46AM (#26868955)

    Ubuntu is derived from the Debian unstable branch. You should be glad Debian is going strong, as what Ubuntu adds is minimal (but still very useful and needed, don't get me wrong).

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 16, 2009 @12:27PM (#26873331)

    It is not the job of the OpenSSL developers to babysit Debian people that don't know what the fuck they are doing.

    Then why didn't they say something to that effect instead of giving faulty advice?

    The OpenSSL are equally at fault, period.

Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable.

Working...