Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
GNU is Not Unix Debian Privacy Ubuntu Linux Your Rights Online

100% Libre, Trisquel 4.5 STS 'Slaine' Released 207

Posted by timothy
from the good-enough-for-rms dept.
Aldenissin writes "Trisquel 4.5 Slaine comes with a new boot manager for the live images, an improved installer which showcases the project highlights, and new programs like the Remmina remote desktop client, the social network client Gwibber or the backup tool Deja-dup. The web browser received several changes to improve attributes like speed by enabling http pipelining and other methods, privacy with blocking third party cookies and moving to Duck Duck Go search engine — both as default, and usability with the preinstalled FlashVideoReplacer plugin that allows watching videos from YouTube, Vimeo and many others. The main packages include: Linux-libre 2.6.35, Xorg 7.5, GNOME 2.32, Mozilla based web browser 3.6.15 and OpenOffice.org 3.2. Slaine is based on Ubuntu 10.10, and as always with Trisquel, it contains just free software. Available are 32 and 64 bit flavors, and being an STS release it will be supported for a year. This release will be the "live" operating system included in the Free Software Foundation member cards from now on, in replacement of Trisquel 4.0."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

100% Libre, Trisquel 4.5 STS 'Slaine' Released

Comments Filter:
  • what the fuck? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 25, 2011 @07:49PM (#35618640)
    I didn't understand half the nouns in that article.
  • Um... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MrEricSir (398214) on Friday March 25, 2011 @07:52PM (#35618660) Homepage

    So on Slashdot we have to tell people who Alan Turing was, but we can just randomly spout off the names of (what I'm assuming to be) little known software packages?

    Come on, guys.

  • by Yosho (135835) on Friday March 25, 2011 @07:55PM (#35618682) Homepage

    The only word in the summary that I recognise is "Release", but I can guess what "Libre" means. I don't know why you can't just use "free."

    Otherwise, could you please give some indication of what the hell this is? I even tried searching Slashdot's archives for other articles with "Trisquel" in them, and this is the only one. Should we have any idea what this is?

  • by larry bagina (561269) on Friday March 25, 2011 @08:11PM (#35618770) Journal

    One of 8 approved [gnu.org] GNU/Linux distributions. None of which matter in the real world.

    Apparently, in order to be an approved FREE software OS, you need to prevent users from using non-free software [gnu.org]. FREE from choice. The ultimate FREEdom.

  • by mjeffers (61490) on Friday March 25, 2011 @08:12PM (#35618788) Homepage

    The next time someone tells me the only reason why [productx] is so popular is due to marketing I'm sending them a link to this summary as an example of why that really really does matter.

  • by zaphirplane (1457931) on Friday March 25, 2011 @08:19PM (#35618840)

    a whole os, distro and the highlights include enabling http pipelining and including a couple of browser add-ons, switching default search engine
    Really ? really ?
    That's the problem that needs solving, thru a new disto

  • by howardd21 (1001567) on Friday March 25, 2011 @08:26PM (#35618902) Homepage
    How pathetic; I am reading this summary, and actually responding, on a Friday evening,...
  • Re:why though (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Tubal-Cain (1289912) on Friday March 25, 2011 @11:52PM (#35620040) Journal

    The main differences from Ubuntu are a rebranded Mozilla browser...

    $ apt-get install abrowser
    There. Ubuntu with an unbranded Firefox. It even removes firefox-branding.

    ...which never suggests the use of Adobe Flash

    Those that care are free to click the "no thanks" button and go without flash online.

    ...and instead uses replacements such as Gnash

    Wow. Best joke I've read all week.

    ...the removal of Ubuntu's Multiverse repository as it contains non-free software...

    Isn't that turned off by default?

    ...and a Linux kernel without any non-free binary blobs. Note that since the Linux kernel contains non-free software it violates its own license.

    So...Ubuntu with Debian's kernel.

  • by Aldenissin (976329) on Saturday March 26, 2011 @12:51AM (#35620226)

    Perhaps it is pretentious, but I think Debian wasn't qualified in the ways you mentioned when these were and the guidlines were set. Also, perhaps it is true that users can't make the distinction. Surely some won't. I am glad that Debian stepped up to match those that worked hard on being endorsed in the other ways. I know Debian was capable when the others were.

    The jail was meant as an analogy. But to continue, if there were multiple exits, and you asked how can you leave, and I said any of them, yet one would lead you to a trap where you were stuck in solitary, that wouldn't be right would it?

    See, freedom ideals are exactly why we have Linux and all the software that is available. It is only available due to sacrifices made by those previously. As time goes on, the sacrifice gets easier and smaller. No one should be able to lock up information, and since knowledge is power, then it IS a jail. A vast plain can be a jail if you have no way to escape.

  • by timbo234 (833667) on Saturday March 26, 2011 @06:33AM (#35621016) Journal

    That's not true. They require the distros to not include non-free software (including not having official 'non-free' repositories), but the user can be allowed to install non-free software.

    Except that having a 'non-free' repo is the means by which users install non-free software. So according to the FSF it's all right if users install non-free software from a repo run by a 3rd party, but it's not all right if the non-free repo is hosted by the Linux distro maker/project itself? Even if the non-free repo is optional. What a pointless, splitting-hairs argument from the FSF.

If a 6600 used paper tape instead of core memory, it would use up tape at about 30 miles/second. -- Grishman, Assembly Language Programming

Working...