Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Debian Software Linux

Libranet 2.8 Released 182

Posted by michael from the debian-spawns-many-but-few-survive dept.
Jon Danzig writes "Hi, Libranet 2.8 has been released and I hope you will inform your readers. Libranet is our implementation of Debian to which we have added our installer, up-to-date software e.g. KDE, Gnome, kernel, etc., and generally packaged GNU/Linux into a super smart fast and stable system. The installer has sophisticated hardware detection and setup with flexable installation of software packages. We keep hearing that the Linux Desktop is on the horizon and while the horizon never gets any closer Libranet is steadily making its way in that direction."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Libranet 2.8 Released More

Libranet 2.8 Released

Comments Filter:

  • Damn you, Open Source. (Score:5, Funny)

    by grub ( 11606 ) <slashdot@grub.net> on Friday May 02, 2003 @08:54AM (#5861201) Homepage Journal

    Quit improving so fast. Wipe machine, install new RedHat. Wipe machine, install new FreeBSD. Wipe machine, install new OpenBSD 3.3. Wipe machine, install new Libranet.

    Can we all just get along?
  • So anyone know which kernel etc this ships with. Also do they maintain their own apt repository?

    Rus

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
      Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:Slashdotted Already.... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by paRcat ( 50146 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @09:04AM (#5861262)
      Also do they maintain their own apt repository?

      good question. In my opinion, to pay $70 for basically... well... knoppix, they better keep their own apt repository stocked with everything I could possibly want, and the latest builds. I want to apt-get the latest kernel within a day or two of release if I have to pay that much.

      Otherwise, what possible motivation would I have to buy it? It doesn't really give me anything.

      And don't think this is just the oss-won't-pay-for-anything mentality. Really... the screenshots look exactly like knoppix without the name. knoppix has the hardware detection, is based on debian, etc. So what logical reason would I have to pay for something that I can already get for free?

      • Re:Slashdotted Already.... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Organic_Info ( 208739 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @09:34AM (#5861404)
        Businesses may want the a support contact that I don't think you can get from Debian.

        As Debian is sooooo stable (and changes infrequently) I always wondered why more SW companies don't list Debian as a suported Linux platform. But it comes down to support, theyre not going to qualify a product on a platform they can't get business support for.

        It's crap that SW companies will qualify a product on a RedHat or SuSE platform that becomes outdated in 6 months. Its to expensive to retest every Six months so technicaly don't support newer distributions (this why RH is shipping AS and AW versions).

        Perhaps thats what Libranet's aiming for - bu then again they appear to be a little known disti so I'm talking crap.

    • Re:Slashdotted Already.... (Score:4, Informative)

      by LittleLebowskiUrbanA ( 619114 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @09:04AM (#5861263) Homepage Journal
      Yes, they have their own apt-repository.
    • They run kernel 2.4.20, and hava their download page here [libranet.com]
      Doesnt look like a free download though.
      Moreover it doesnt [libranetlinux.com] look like they even run their own repository from this comment in their forums (scroll down a bit).
      Looks like a Debian with slightly newer packages and for which you have to pay.

      • Re:Slashdotted Already.... (Score:5, Informative)

        by Enahs ( 1606 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @09:56AM (#5861525) Journal
        I was a happy Libranet user for a while; they do maintain a repository of updates. Most of the updates come from the "official" Debian distribution, though.

        Basically what you're paying for is, as far as I can tell, a raftload of up-to-date apps, an up-to-date kernel, some convenience apps for setting things up nicely, all on top of a relatively stable release of Debian. If they've bumped their price up as one poster said, I don't see how it's worth it. When I bought a copy, it was on a set of CD-Rs and came with a manual--on letter-size paper stapled together, no less.

        It's nice, it's stable, it's relatively hassle-free (as hassle-free as Debian ever is, and then some) so decide whether or not that's worth your while. It wasn't to me, but then again, I'm foolish enough to use Gentoo Linux as my main distribution.
    • They have an apt repository for the things that they have written (adminmenu, and the like). Otherwise, apt-get.org is your friend.

  • Menu proliferation (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mccalli ( 323026 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @08:58AM (#5861225) Homepage
    Examine this screenshot [libranet.com]. What's the difference between the Applications, Office and OpenOffice.org Office menus?

    Now, admittedly I'm not a KDE user so this might be something that KDE imposes rather than Libranet, but even so is it really necessary to have three submenus for this?

    Cheers,
    Ian

    • A problem with the KDE menu (Score:5, Insightful)

      by override11 ( 516715 ) <cpeterson@gts.gaineycorp.com> on Friday May 02, 2003 @09:14AM (#5861305) Homepage
      Can someone please explain to me why they need to have a 'Preferences', a 'Tools', a 'System Settings', a 'Utilities', and a damn 'Control Center'!!! MAKE A CONTROL PANEL!! Put it all in the same place!! Every time I go to look for a dang program setting I have to wade through menu options forever! Is this some strange organizational system that makes sense to everyone else but me?!?? :)
      • It's not just you. I think that KDE really missed the boat on that one. They spent a lot of time designing UI guidelines, unified printing, and polishing the GUI gleaming that they missed the most basic part, sane 'Start Menu' layout.

        Of course We could always go do it ourselves...
      • ...wade through menu options...

        Windows users should feel right at home.

  • Cool down (Score:4, Funny)

    by anandcp ( 617121 ) <anandcp.tatanova@com> on Friday May 02, 2003 @08:59AM (#5861231)
    Looks kinda cool, but can we cool down news of such Linux releases back-to-back. First it was Redhat 9, then Redhat 64-bit, SuSE 8.2, now Libranet.
    Look, where is Windows man? I mean Windows 2003, reviews, ads, interviews by Steve Ballmer about how his coders worked 46 hours a day, ads for Win 64 bit???
    Slashdot must be neutral.
    • It would be much more exciting if MS would release something that was not for the masses to beta test. My company's beta with 2003 is going swell, and we only had to pay $499 for it. It does not run SQL, Exchange or other servers we would like it too, but hey LOOK AT THE PRETTY GUI!!!
      8 crashes in 7 days and counting. I now await the 100 MB patch surely on the way from them.
    • Ah, if Slashdot were gonna enthuse about Windows, it'd not be /. - it'd be \.

  • where are the screenshots of the installer? (Score:4, Informative)

    by garcia ( 6573 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @08:59AM (#5861233)
    for a distribution that is based on Debian and apparently only differs in its installer, I see no screenshots of the installer in action.

    I would never have the desire for a GUI install, it's just not necessary for me, but I would like to see what makes this particular distribution so special that I would have to pay for it...

    The screenshots of the desktops look like any other KDE/Gnome desktop screenshot I have seen.

    Where's the beef?

  • Name? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Amarok.Org ( 514102 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @09:00AM (#5861238)
    Come on... Libranet? Won't this be mistaken for some astrological based dating service?


    (Insert smileys where appropriate - it's a joke, son.)

  • Sun drops their distro. And there are 6 others to take its place :)
  • Semi-rare to be able to post quickly.

    My take is that these guys are going to fall by the wayside unless the open source community stands behind them bigtime. Imagine if SCO went after this company first.

    Just a thought.

  • Great distribution (Score:5, Informative)

    by LittleLebowskiUrbanA ( 619114 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @09:01AM (#5861250) Homepage Journal
    I run Redhat for clients and on a couple of boxes at home but IMHO Libranet can't be beat. Using 2.7 and apt-get is a relief sometimes after putting up w/ Mandrake's and Redhat's rpm dependencies. The Adminmenu tool works great, even comes w/ a built in firewall. The installer is ncurses based and not as pretty as other distros but it works and works well. Hell, Libranet is the first distribution that I got Return to Castle Wolfenstein running on. Some problem or the other always crops up w/ Redhat. Also, the mailing list is well populated w/ helpful people. Not much RTFM comments on there.

  • YAD -- Yet another distro... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Jerk City Troll ( 661616 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @09:02AM (#5861254) Homepage
    Yet another failure. There's so many "desktop distros" out there that completely miss the point. This appears to be, like in most cases, a simple packing of sources straight from KDE, GNOME, etc. That's not how you create a good desktop distribution.

    Desktop environments such as GNOME and KDE are like reference implimentations. They demonstrate the technology they've created. They show one way it could be used to create a usable environment. I argue that they are not necessarily meant to fall directly into the hands of end users. The reason for this is that the coders are not user interface specialists, they're technologists. They have little talent for creating a system grandma can use. Case in point: look at the default GNOME 2 environment from the project and look at how RedHat reworked it. Out of the box, GNOME 2 is almost completely unusable in my opinion whereas on RedHat 9, it's excellent.

    RedHat, in my opinion, have got it right. I recently tried installing RedHat 9 on my mom's new system and I will never look back at other distros for desktop purposes. They took technologies provided by KDE and GNOME and put them together in such a way that serious consideration was given to usability! They didn't just package up the source trees and say: "Here! Linux for the desktop!" They created a tightly integrated environment with simplified menus, a good theme, powerful but understandable tools for configuration, and all that. Once again: it's not just a blind repackaging.

    If we want Linux to move to the desktop, there needs to be more effort towards making these environments really usable. They are currently designed by techies for techies and that just does not cut it. So in this respect, Libranet is not much better (save installation tools) than default Debian or any other distro that gives no thought to the big picture.
    • You don't know what you're talking about. I run both Redhat 9 and Libranet so I think I'm a bit more qualified to comment. Aside from your gripes about the default Gnome install (I wouldn't know, I don't use Gnome), Libranet 2.7 (haven't bought 2.8 yet) is far and away better thatn Redhat 9. No more endless lib dependencies when installing a package, everything just works. In my opinion, usability also is a measure of how hard it is to install a package, recompile a kernel, etc. Not just the menus.

      • Re:Well, have you tried Libranet? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Jerk City Troll ( 661616 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @09:31AM (#5861390) Homepage
        In my opinion, usability also is a measure of how hard it is to install a package, recompile a kernel, etc.

        I am not talking about usability for people who need nothing more than vi, find, and grep to manipulate their system. My mother doesn't care about installing packages or recompiling kernels. She, like many other users, wants a system that behaves in an intuitive way, and just works the way it's expected to work. RedHat has pulled that off quite nicely. Not to mention that in an ideal system, you don't have to install packages yourself or recompile the kernel (especially the latter). With RedHat9, everything my mother's system needed was right on the three discs. The kernel didn't need recompiled because it was all modular. Nevertheless, these still are not usability issues my mother is concerned with. What is a usability issue is that the menus were cleanly arranged -- programs she would use where there. The user interface is consistent, beyond just look and feel but also organization, and so on. RedHat 9's environment felt a lot like MacOS X's environment insofar as its clean, elegant features.

        I haven't even gotten into how much better apt-get is.

        I am a Debian user and have been for years now. Debian is the only distro that I would ever use and ever recommend to other technically minded people. However, after wrestling with boring, default Debian packages for the desktop environment and other annoyances that just would not work (truetype in Mozilla for instance) I found RedHat was far better suited to the task of being a desktop distribution. Most everything I needed worked out of the box, many things I never got quite right in Debian. As for installing things like Flash, that's 3rd party software and it's an annoyance on any platform.

        Libranet is nothing special outside vanilla Debian, so that makes it even more irrelevant in this case.
        • Perhaps that should be "LibraNet will be nothing special, after Debian gets their new installer working".

          I have been quite impressed by LibraNet for a long time (well, over a year). Yes, it's basically Debian. So? The point of *any* distribution is to take a version of Linux, select software that works with it, and package it together. There probably isn't a large market for Debian configurations, but LibraNet has been doing it well for quite awhile. And some of my systems don't have *ANY* internet co
          • Perhaps that should be "LibraNet will be nothing special, after Debian gets their new installer working".

            To use the overworked car analogy "Should a driver be concerned the tools their mechanic has or even the tools used on the production line where the car was made?"

            And some of my systems don't have *ANY* internet connection, much less a high speed one, so this is important to me. More and more of the distributions seem to assume that you will have a high speed internet connection, but this is only occ
        • May we interest you in apt-get for redhat 9? :)

          I'm prettty much w/ you 100% on this one.. I used to use debian back in the 2.1/2.2 (I'm not sure what they are on now) days when the packages were a bit out of date for a distribution. Nonetheless as tools I really liked apt-* and even dselect. Redhat is a great user-friendly (nice fonts , 3rd party software) distribution but no apt-get/no dselect and up2date sucks.

          But .. grab apt and synaptic from below:

          http://shrike.freshrpms.net/

          (it is available for red
        • Libranet is nothing special outside vanilla Debian, so that makes it even more irrelevant in this case.

          Considering that Libranet offers support for users who purchase their distro, that is one offering over Debian. I'm not talking about mailing lists or newsgroups, but full "corporate approved" support. Granted, their support staff doesn't equate to that of RedHat or IBM, but I imagine there are a few small businesses who have gone with Libranet because its a company designed around their distro.

          RedHat h
        • To echo a wise Anonymous Coward below, have you TRIED Libranet? Maybe, just maybe it's more than plain vanilla Debian w/ an installer like you hypothesized.
      • In my opinion, usability also is a measure of how hard it is to install a package, recompile a kernel, etc.

        Only where you have a situation where a machine is used and administered by the same person. This list (including installing the system in the first place) just isn't relevent where there is a user (or users) who simply use the machine.

        Not just the menus. Libranet's Adminmenu tool allows any newbie to setup a personal firewall, install packages, recompile a kernel, install Flash, install Microsoft
    • I completely agree but it's strange how the desktop projects themselves seem to dislike this. Look at all the complaining about how Red Hat had 'broken' KDE in the 8.0 release by theming it and changing the default browser to Mozilla. Some of the KDE developers seem to think that _they_ should decide the user interface experience, and that a common look and feel between KDE on different platforms (Linux, BSD, Solaris etc) is more important than a common look and feel within a distribution.

      (Yet within the
      • KDE is a GUI not just a window manager. As such it includes a full desktop experience which goes well beyond theming. In RedHat's KDE RedHat did much more than remove a theme. They imposed Gnome tools and Gnome apps as part of KDE. They removed credit from the KDE group. They changed help files. They even removed nationalities to change KDE's political position on Taiwan.
        • And with free software, they are legally allowed to do as such. I agree that it probably wasn't the most tasteful move, but they are selling their package to companies that find such unification of desktop environments useful (particularly if the purchaser is interested in running its own internal helpdesk to support its own RedHat installations).

          I personally don't like KDE's bastardization in RH 8+, but I don't think anything less of RedHat for it-- they're selling a unified product to their customers who
      • I completely agree but it's strange how the desktop projects themselves seem to dislike this. Look at all the complaining about how Red Hat had 'broken' KDE in the 8.0 release by theming it and changing the default browser to Mozilla. Some of the KDE developers seem to think that _they_ should decide the user interface experience, and that a common look and feel between KDE on different platforms (Linux, BSD, Solaris etc) is more important than a common look and feel within a distribution.

        Best summed up a
    • Thanks for sharing your utterly valueless opinion. I agree that RH is moving things in a good direction; can't say I agree that they're getting it right. Sorry to hear that you've discovered how terrible GNOME really is. Most pro-GNOME (and anti-KDE) zealots I've run into are RH users, who don't seem to realize that what GNOME and KDE are on RH doesn't necessarily represent reality.
      • I agree that RH is moving things in a good direction; can't say I agree that they're getting it right.

        They are most certainly "getting it right". When I can plug in a printer and have it working in 4 mouse clicks, or my Palm, or whatever else, I'd say things are in pretty good shape. While Windows isn't largely usable, it's better than most OSS default desktop environments. RedHat's modifications and clean-up certainly clears Windows right out of the picture -- it'd say is more in league with OS X as f
        • The "Network Servers" GUI for browsing samba shares doesn't work for me on Redhat 9. I tried combing the web, fixing it myself, etc... No matter what I get this weird "host (null)" error, when I try to use "Network Servers" or Nautilus (by typing "smb:" into the location field) to view the samba network.

          Everything else seems to be working, but this is a show stopper for me. I have a network of tons of windows computers, and need to share printers, files... and see their printers and files.

          So I guess I
        • "Out of the box", it's unusable. I don't know what they were thinking with the default Sawfish configuration or the arrangement of the Mac-like menu bar across the top and the tasks list on the bottom.

          Uh, what? Look, I know that you're trying to ramp up lots of karma in order to troll later, it says so in your user profile, but if you're going to do it, do it properly. GNOME2 doesn't use sawfish by default, and the top bar is not "Mac like" - that would imply that application menu bars get put there. It'

  • Why? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ajuda ( 124386 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @09:02AM (#5861257)
    Why do they need a NEW distrobution for this? Can't they just add their improvements to Debian? Now I need 10 distros based off Debian. One for installs, one for graphics, one for music, one for work, one for servers... I mean come on! Let's work together here!

    • Re:Why? (Score:5, Funny)

      by bwalling ( 195998 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @09:08AM (#5861283) Homepage
      Why do they need a NEW distrobution for this? Can't they just add their improvements to Debian?

      Because if it were easy to install, it wouldn't be Debian.
      • This is a joke, right? Or a troll?
    • Why do they need a NEW distrobution for this?

      Because they can. What more of a reason is needed? If people are buying it, then its a good move for them.

  • I'd like to try it... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jdreed1024 ( 443938 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @09:04AM (#5861266)
    ...but unfortunately, it appears that you can't, at least not without paying. They're pretty crafty about it too, adding both a "Buy" and "Download" link, however the "Download" link merely takes you to a page [libranet.com] where you can choose to purchase the downloadable version for anywhere from $39.95 (student) to $104.95 (Institution), or you can purchase the previous (2.7) version for ($24.95). If there's a place where you can try it for free, it's not linked from their site.

    Now, this is not to say there's anything wrong with trying to make money from Linux. However, it's truly unfortunate that there's no way to check out this distro without shelling out some money. RedHat lets you download for free, as do all the other major distros. However, they'll also take your money if you want the box version or if you want support. Libranet can't seriously hope people will shell out money to switch to this without being given a risk-free chance to experience it.

    And, since they basically took Debian, modified it, and made it not-free as in beer, I'm wondering why they just got free publicity on Slashdot.

    • And, since they basically took Debian, modified it, and made it not-free as in beer, I'm wondering why they just got free publicity on Slashdot. Depends on your definition of modified. According the the GPL [fsf.org], section 2b),

      You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License.

      Since it doesn't appear to be possible to get a free

      • Re:I'd like to try it... (Score:5, Informative)

        by sholden ( 12227 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @09:47AM (#5861466) Homepage
        Maybe you should learn how to read legalese.

        They don't have to give away the software, however, they can't stop someone from buying one copy and then giving away copies of it (assumming they don't have non-free components - in which case those components would need to be removed).

        If you get your hands on a copy the GPL kicks in, but the GPL doesn't force them to pay for the bandwidth so you can have a free copy.
      • Since it doesn't appear to be possible to get a free copy of the software from these people, and the software is in fact Debian, looks to me like they're in violation of the GPL.

        Actually, they have no obligation to supply you with source unless you buy the distro.
    • Is it free-as-in-Debian? If so, you might persuade Cheap Bytes or similar reseller to burn copies.
    • debian isn't free as in beer either. someone's got to pay the debian bandwidth usages. there's nothing that says they can't charge for their distro, if you want to try it, borrow a cd from some one who's got it. i'm sure eventually there will be iso's available somewhere
  • So, what is the real diference between the Libranet "system" and everyone elses "package". They stress that they are different because their product is a system, but never really give solid examples of the way(s) their system is different than a package. There is almost too much variety available to make a decision on which system/package to use without going to the trouble of trying several of them. While that can be fun, sometimes you just need to get something installed and running without too much "b

  • Should be better than knoppix (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mnmn ( 145599 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @09:32AM (#5861391) Homepage

    Since we have to pay for it, they should really offer something worth $70 over other free distros. Firstly, if they can somehow offer the drivers with the package, nvidia, tokenring in default installs, they'd be QUITE different.

    But I would personally pay for a distro that can completely strip down the binaries, even stripping off READMEs and man pages, and compiling it optimised for size. Knoppix is one awesome distro that can detect most hardware, and comes with so much command line utilities, but something that can beat that would be worth 70.

  • I can't find a way to download libranet at all (either iso or separate packages). They require you to pay to download anything...

    thanks, but no thanks. I'll stick with Red Hat.

    • Last time I checked one could download 2.0 for free (the major mirrors have it), and the talk was that 2.7 would become free when 2.8 was released. (or 2.4, whatever)

      They do have their own repositories, and one can upgrade their distro from 2.0 to 2.8, via dist-upgrade. I have done it, and it works great.

      Libranet works quite nice, with all the stuff in place, but nothing you couldn't achieve with debian sid and a little work (excluding this adminmenu, wich is a nice util, but nothing special)

  • libranet trolls (Score:5, Informative)

    by zuralin ( 462240 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @09:53AM (#5861510)
    Everyone who is trolling libranet has obviously never used it before *waits for more trolls on how it isnt free*... For those that want a preview on what they can expect can go to LinuxISO [linuxiso.org] and download libranet's 2.0 essential version. I have tried it and it is absolutely fantastic--from the installation to the tools (adminmenu) everything worked great, better than any linux distro I have ever used.
    Libranet is also well known for having superior technical support and has a very friendly userbase that offers to help the newbies rather than tell them to RTFM.
    Try before you Troll, thanks
    • I will second this comment and also point out that with the 2.0 version (free version), what you get is woody (Debian 3.0) with an installer that actually autodetects video, sound and network cards and an administrative tool adminmenu and xadminmenu that is very functional. Neither of these tools are GPL'd. The third thing is it is setup to always run Xwindows. If you like the idea of Debian for ease of software updates and security updates (direct from security.debian.org) but have difficulty setting up De
  • So if all you're paying for is the download bandwidth and support, why doesn't some kind soul offer mirrors of the downloads?
    Perfectly acceptable under the GPL, right?
  • Mother! Do you want to hack Libranet with me?! Do want to test it for bugs, download the ISOs, mother?!!?

    Not about to use Gentoo! Do you want to Libranet with me?!?! Let me show you whats its.....* fierce drum beat*.....

  • Another Linux Distribution????
    Another Fork?
    Toghter we stand, Divided We Fall.... /*Why is there a penguin on my desktop?!*/
    • Libranet is possibly the oldest distro based off of Debian, predating Corel (RIP), Stormix (RIP), Progeny (RIP), LNX-BBC, Lindows, Lycorix, Knoppix and Morphix. (Not sure how it compares age-wise to LRP -- but then LRP is rather specialized.) If you haven't heard of it, it's probably because it's most popular in Europe.

      This is not "another Linux Distribution", this is an old, well-established Linux Distribution; if you want to complain about something, go complain about "new-fangled" Distros like Mandrak

  • Desktop Debian *IS* closer (Score:3, Informative)

    by martinde ( 137088 ) on Friday May 02, 2003 @11:17AM (#5862117) Homepage
    Ummm, KDE 3.1 just came into Debian in it's entirety, finally, and now packages that depend on KDE are coming into unstable. (Cool stuff like K3B.) If you run unstable, you can build a NICE desktop system already. (KDE took forever to come in for a variety of reasons, but I'd say that the biggest holdup was the ever-changing g++ ABI, which is outside of Debian's control. Wanting to "do the right thing" and work out the technical problems of live updates within Debian took some time given the shifting ABI - it's a complex problem.)

    Also, the debian-installer people are making big progress as we speak. Debian is improving daily. Desktop Debian is a reality for some, and will be a reality for more people soon.
  • As one of the beta testers for Libranet, and responding to such debates on the Libranet discussion board, I will wade in with my views.
    The GPL does not prohibet selling code, just modifing it and not releasing it. All the source is located on the installed hard drive in /usr/lib/adminmenu. It is just a bunch of perl and shell scripts that make configuring things easier. Unless you really enjoy playing find the config file, then this is not for you. All this crap about Red Hat being the top shit of Linux
    • Red Hats absoulute reliance on GUI tools and inablity to issue common root commands from xwindows makes it to combuersome to use. (Open a term as root and try ifconfig
      That's because you are using the su command without an "-" appended to it ("su -"). If you don't add the "-" it will have the same path as your normal user account, which means stuff in the /sbin directory will require that you specify their full path.

    • I was with you until you started to bash knoppix

      I bought a new Toshiba Satellite Pro 6100 last week while abroad. I knew I was going to be buying a laptop while in North America (NA keyboards are better from programming than Euro keyboards. I live in Italy (no tilda, no backtick on Italian keyboards) and though I could remap the keyboard, in brain-dead moments it's nice to have a visual queue. And with the Euro being so much stronger than the Ameripeso and Canpeso, I was in for a (relative) bargain.

      With

    • The GPL does not prohibet selling code, just modifing it and not releasing it.

      The GPL allows you to modify code and not release it.
      The GPL takes effect when you distribute code, selling is a type of distribution. What it prevents you from doing is distributing binaries without the source being available, to whoever you distribute the binaries to, or attempting to place restrictions not in the GPL to anyone you supply the software to.
  • I've used Knoppix and default Debian. I've never used Xandros or Libranet. How do these three compare as a poweruser desktop (i.e. sort of like what Mandrake is usually used for).
  • Friends, if you can get your hands on a Libranet distribution, do so. Jon and Tal Danzig make an older version (2.0, maybe 2.7 some time soon) freely available in ISO image form, and I've seen places that will sell you CD, CDR, or CD/RW forms of the ISO images for a very modest sum.

    The 2.7 distribution is very reasonably priced, especially when you consider what's available in it.

    Now as we all know, any Linux system contains code that's freely available over the Internet. It's the packaging that we pay
  • Somone have this and want to put up a bittorrent?

Slashdot Top Deals

The use of money is all the advantage there is to having money. -- B. Franklin

Close