New Debian-based Enterprise Linux? 145
arkanoid.dk writes "Sources close to Progeny, Mandriva and Turbolinux report that a new Enterprise Linux distribution is on its way. Apparently, the distribution will be based on Debian 3.1 Sarge and will form the foundation of the next server distributions from the three companies. The three companies hope that the new distribution will enable them to compete with the market leaders Red Hat and Novell Inc's server distributions. An interesting part is that the new system should support both DEB (Debian package) and RPM (Red Hat Package Management) to enable better cross-compatibility with other Linux flavours. The vendor said: 'It will have a nice, Web-based front end for service management, which Sarge lacks. It's basically oriented toward edge-of-the-network type applications, such as ISP software.'"
How is this new? (Score:5, Insightful)
I've always considered stock Debian stable to be "Enterprise Grade" for a Linux distribution. Between a huge number of architectures, excellent package management, and great security team, it's my first choice for a server distribution.
Also, Debian has had "RPM compatibility" in the form of Alien for quite some time.
Re:How is this new? (Score:3, Insightful)
It really has nothing to do with the package management choice as the summary suggests
Re:How is this new? (Score:1)
Re:How is this new? (Score:2)
I realize that there is much more to this tool then package management
not to beat the dead horse some more, but... (Score:2)
As far as I can tell, anyone that wants Enterprise Linux uses Red Hat, not Debian. Maybe I'm out of the loop, but it doesn't appear Debian's major user base are businesses. And even if they were, is it really such a chore to upgrade every 12 months, when it's Free? Why have Debian taken it upon themse
Re:not to beat the dead horse some more, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
> to upgrade every 12 months, when it's Free?
Yes it is. When they have critical systems that work, they don't want to break it under any circumstance. They don't care about what's new and hip (like geeks, consumers, and programmers like you and me). They just want to get work done and they don't want any surprises.
Most enterprises prefer a 3-5 year upgrade cycle.Some don't want to upgrade 20 old COBOL code, because it works and an upgrade would mean that you have to restart your QA from ground zero. All software has bugs and limitations, but with new software, you have a new set of bugs and a new of limitations (like new memory requirements or dropping old hardware devices). The key difference is that with the old OS, the limitations and bugs are known and workarounds are documented, while in the new OS they aren't. That's why the Linux 2.0 kernel is *still* being patched with security fixes, even though it was first released in 1997 and is really stale. That's why Windows *2000* is still quite popular in enterprise even though everyone knows that move to XP/2003/Longhorn is inevitable, and why some enterprise software still requires Windows NT.
If it works and security patches (without new features/bugs) are kept up to date, why should you have to "fix" it? The only thing Debian needs to be enterprise grade is a predictable 3-5 year release cycle (or the willingness to support all versions of Debian for this long.) so that enterprises can plan their upgrades and burn in verification in an orderly fashion. That appears to be what the new Debian president is promising.
The new "United Linux" group just adds a bit more credibility to that promise.
Re:not to beat the dead horse some more, but... (Score:2)
Re:not to beat the dead horse some more, but... (Score:2)
Not being out on the Internet doesn't make it immune to security issues, it just means it's a smaller target.
Re:not to beat the dead horse some more, but... (Score:1)
I think it's fair to say that Debian has a relatively large following on the small/home office desktop, whereas RedHat does not. However this doesn't mean that Debian hasn't been competitive with RedHat/FC in enterprise environments.
Re:not to beat the dead horse some more, but... (Score:1)
Re:not to beat the dead horse some more, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Be careful with your pronouns. I'm not sure who you mean by "their" as your statement implies that the Debian organization is going enterprise. This just simply isn't the case. The article speaks of a "trio of companies," not the Debian organization. This sort of makes your point moot, be
Re:not to beat the dead horse some more, but... (Score:1)
Re:How is this new? (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem is how deeply intricate services in Unix are. Everything has to be put in a certain folder. Everything has different runlevels. Everything's got different start
Re:How is this new? (Score:1, Offtopic)
http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000172.htm
Re:How is this new? (Score:1)
Supporting many varying architectures, and allowing you to install every Tetris clone ever written is great, but most corporations I've ever worked with are more interested in stability and making sure there's a decent support path if say I get hit by a bus, or when there's a problem and the three vendors for the proprietary software running on a particular Linux box all start pointing fingers at each
Re:How is this new? (Score:2, Informative)
From RH 7.1 to 7.3 to 8 to 9 was some of the most harrowing experiences I've had with Linux.
Transitioning from Debian stable to testing (and following the changes in testing) has allowed myself and
Re:How is this new? (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's a hint: The original RedHat linux (version 9) and Fedora Core are not supposed to be used in the enterprise. They have RHEL for that. Which, incidentally, does not change. Patches get backported, which ensures stability.
If you were really trying to run a production system on Fedora, then you deserve what you got. Which, hopefully, was fired.
Re:How is this new? (Score:3, Interesting)
When you've paid for an office full of VMware 3.2 and Rational Rose in a development environment, its rather off-putting when these apps advertised as RedHat compatible will only run on newer distros that are UN-related to RedHat. Having a workstation with RHEL did not help this problem. In this scenario, VMware required the customer to upgrade their product ($$$) and Rational stopped playing the game and drew the line
Re:How is this new? (Score:2)
Other linux vendors seem to think more about a flashy first impression; they generally work well if you never change much from the release you bought or use any non-mainstream software, but as soon as you try to upgrade something
Clearly there's room for a layer of "paid responsibility" on top of Debian though, someone who will do the dirty work when
Re:How is this new? (Score:2)
I'm assuming you're a troll because it would be rude of me to assume that you're an idiot.
Please don't call it something Goofy (Score:1, Insightful)
In particular, it shoud
Re:Please don't call it something Goofy (Score:2)
This is a misconception that often comes up on Slashdot. The Ubuntu / Debian people are likely all about "humanity, caring, and harmony" and not at all about "'unfair competitive advantage' rather than charitable sharing.". Those who criticise and who don't understand, those not politically / et
Re:Please don't call it something Goofy (Score:2)
But "Microsoft" has already been taken?!
*Appologies - I don't normally do the MS bashing thing but the temptation was too great!!
Re:Please don't call it something Goofy (Score:2)
And unless you already know where the Debian name came from, who would guess upon looking at it, that is the contraction of two names ?
I think Debian has a nice, neutral ring to it, very suited to use as a brand name, and certainly more creative than MS's usage of day-to-day words.
Re:How is this new? (Score:2)
The real dual-packagements is when you can install RPM package and have it cooperate - provide "provides", require "reuqirement" - for any
Re:How is this new? (Score:1)
Even if that works, it is still a bad idea. Packages are made and QA tested by a distributor for their own distribution. Dependencies are only really meaningful for one distribution. Different distributions have different policies, different infrastructure packages to depend on.
Re:How is this new? (Score:2)
LSB packages are RPM packages. LSB just took an older version of RPM and made it their "standard". Which is why Debian has stayed separate with their .deb format, as they weren't consulted nor were their concerns addressed by the LSB "standard".
The package formats aren't really the issue anyway, the issue is all the detailed rules (explicit, written down, implied, and/or undocumented) that are applied by each distro in how and where packages and their co
Re:How is this new? (Score:5, Insightful)
Deb and RPM (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Deb and RPM (Score:1)
Secondly, WHAT THE HELL IS WITH THE DISTRIBUTION MADNESS????? Why can't they just talk to the Ubuntu people (the only people who really have a chance at a new enterprize debian-based system, but only if they play their cards right), and work out the differences?
Re:Deb and RPM (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Deb and RPM (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh and I hope you don't plan on using dvd::rip or other dvd creation tools that require mplayer. Mplayer segfaults all over the place due to an audio bug and the ubuntu devs have done nothing to fix it.
The kings of the linux desktop will remain Suse, Mandrake and maybe even Fedora until the Ubuntu devs take their distro more seriously. I like it and run it but it's definitely got alot of weirdness they need to work out.
Re:Deb and RPM (Score:2)
Re:Deb and RPM (Score:2)
"Do you want to install Flash? Y/n"
y
This will change repositories and update your system to include flash in your browser(s) etc. Sure?
Why not include the multiple repositories that you need to install all the desktop stuff in different apt.conf files?
Re:Deb and RPM (Score:2)
Re:Deb and RPM (Score:2)
Before Ubuntu started, the project UserLinux started, and Ubuntu shares with it plenty of its qualities. In fact, they started at the same time with so many similiar qualities, I'm totally not surprised that one of them died, and the other lived.
Secondly, business machines are Desktop Machines. They are also Laptops. They are also Workstations. They are also Servers of many different kinds. You can't just say a business machine is one of
Re:Deb and RPM (Score:2)
2) Enterprise means
a) Very high reliability
b) Long lifespan for support contracts
c) High levels of paid support and technical services available
d) Lots of QA with configurations and various expensive apps
How is that at all similar to what a consumme
Re:Deb and RPM (Score:2)
2 a+b) See the recent Ubuntu Foundation and extended support lifecycle announcement.
2 c) From Canonical and partners around the world, for Ubuntu on desktops and servers.
2 d) Know what the answer to a+b means?
(see my answer re: consumer desktops earlier in the thread)
Re:Deb and RPM (Score:2)
The main point however which you get and the GP doesn't get is that enterprise and consummer desktop aren't the same thing.
Re:Deb and RPM (Score:2)
Re:Deb and RPM (Score:2)
Mandrake/Mandriva similarly was a far better desktop distribution than RedHat primarily because they consider their c
RPM is the only thing the article focuses on? (Score:4, Interesting)
IMO Debian/Ubuntu needs this (Score:1)
2. Letting apt (even dpkg) uninstall/upgrade any RPM packages that are already installed. This doesn't mean an RPM repository has to be maintained, only that apt be able to upgrade an RPM package with a DEB when necessary.
Supported hardware? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Supported hardware? (Score:2)
Re:Supported hardware? (Score:2)
Re:Supported hardware? (Score:2)
wrong, sorry. (Score:2)
Re:Supported hardware? (Score:2)
Yes, Sparc/MIPS/Alpha/PARISC is hobbiest-dabbler territory.
However, businesses do rely on x86, x86-64, PowerPC (IBM servers), Itanium (HP, etc), and S/390, so multi-arch support is very important to some.
Re:Supported hardware? (Score:2)
Re:Supported hardware? (Score:2)
With that said, Xandros does put considerable emphasis on their OS having a particular desktop evironment KDE, so I'm really not surprised that swapping out the desktop is problematic. Personally I wouldn't want an OS where the basic GUI could be changed willy-nilly, and distros that stick to one DE have recognized the need
You know its going to suck when... (Score:4, Interesting)
1) We don't put enough time into our packages to make our package system fully functional.
2) We, and our users, approach the package system in a hackish way.
Yes, Debian has 'alien', but they're not really advertising it, nor would I reccomend using it except in extreme circumstances (e.g. no source.tar.gz). That these guys advertise this compatibility speaks very ill about their distro, IMO.
Re:You know its going to suck when... (Score:3, Insightful)
It can be done. I'm writing this on a slackware system that uses emerde [freaknet.org]. I can emerge or use gentoo binary packages for programs, and I can use slackware packages. The two fit together perfectly, the programs update the "database" of each packaging system from the other one. Although it would be harder with the more complex rpm and deb, I don't think it's impossible.
Re:You know its going to suck when... (Score:1)
Re:You know its going to suck when... (Score:2)
My reason for guessing smart is the answer is that its a Conectiva initiative, w
You know someone hasn't read the article when... (Score:4, Informative)
The tool is able to use debian and rpm repositories natively. It also does a lot of good things that no other tool, yum, apt or urpmi currently does. The people doing the research for it are current and former apt and urpmi developers and they have done their homework.
So, stop spreading misinformation about something which you have not taken the time to understand.
Re:You know someone hasn't read the article when.. (Score:2)
Ditto cups, gnome, kde, x.org, you name it, any large package that's factored into small parts by distributions is just begging for trouble.
Better to have one distro that gets it right.
(and, no, I didn't read the article, and your post _is_ informative, btw)
Since when does compatibility suck? (Score:2)
Well in *my* opinion the majority of people do NOT share your opinion about compatibility. I don't think I've ever heard an average end user of PCs (or any other product for that matter) say "hmm...this product interoperates with multiple standards...that means it sucks. I'll pick this other one that's only half as compatible with other people's stuff--since they didn't think of interoperability it must be better at othe
Re:Since when does compatibility suck? (Score:2)
Uh, I thought there was public consensus on this that packaging software is the whole point of the "distribution" concept! What is it you think distributions are supposed to do, if not this?!
Re:Since when does compatibility suck? (Score:2)
The problem is that there is no standard so the whole point is completely lost! It's fine and dandy to say RPM is a standard packaging method but I can't just say (for example) I don't like SuSE's Apache RPMS so I'll just use Mandrake's instead--they are both RPMs sure, but if I try that you'll get mired in "depende
Reading up on Progeny. (Score:2)
If they are, then maybe they need to switch to a Debian-based distro rather than using Fedora.
Re:Reading up on Progeny. (Score:1)
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progeny_Linux_Systems [wikipedia.org]
Progeny Linux Systems
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Progeny provides Linux platform technology. Their Platform Services technology supports both Debian and RPM-based distributions for Linux platforms. Ian Murdock, the founder of Debian, is the founder, CTO and Chairman of the Board. Progeny makes a distribution of Linux called Progeny Deb
What about Oracle certification? (Score:5, Insightful)
If these folks get Oracle certification, I'll be thrilled to have them in the marketplace. Otherwise, as far as my employer and I are concerned, they're "enterprise" in name alone.
(Oh -- and if you're considering Oracle, count the extra cost of a certified OS in as part of what you'll be paying for it. That, and the hair loss and headaches).
Re:What about Oracle certification? (Score:2)
Re:What about Oracle certification? (Score:1)
Re:What about Oracle certification? (Score:3, Insightful)
If you're considering Oracle -- don't.
Re:What about Oracle certification? (Score:3, Insightful)
There are valid reasons to use Oracle. Those reasons aren't always technical ones, though.
(There are *certainly* good technical reasons for using a real, enterprise-level DBMS; I'm not disputing that. Further, there are few folks I hold in lower esteem than those willing to use for mission critical work a database developed by folks who once said in public that such features as referential integrity were not worth having).
Novell should be very concerned (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Novell should be very concerned (Score:2)
Also, want
Re:Novell should be very concerned (Score:2)
Interesting? (Score:2)
Re:Interesting? (Score:1)
Oh Boy! (Score:2)
For the slow ones out there, that was sarcasm..
Another OpenLinux ? (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem is, each distribution has its own set of goals. Or at least it better have - otherwise there is no reason for it to exist. And while there are different sets of goals, there will always be problems with maintaining a unified base.
The main problem, however, is that "enterpriseness" of the distribution is not about the choice of package format or a set of packages, or a cute name. It is about support. RHEL per se is not much different from dozens of other distributions on the market. It is the support behind it that makes it so attractive in the eyes of the IT industry. And this is really what any join effoer for another enterprise-ready distribution should be about.
Another UnitedLinux ? (Score:2)
There may be problems maintaining a common base or there may not. UnitedLinux tanked for completely unrelated reasons: one of the players (Suse) got bought by Novell, and another (Caldera) went insane, renamed themselves to T
I may just be snarky today (it's hot) but... (Score:5, Funny)
So the distribution will install Webmin and a range of the modules by _default_? Yipee! I've been waiting for that innovation. NOW I'll be able to use linux!
You're snarky. (Score:2)
Those who've used Linux for awhile probably know useradd, passwd and chage. For those who don't , and who need to achieve a task, having easily discoverable ways to doing things is an essential.
No commercial support from the software vendor (Score:3, Insightful)
Apparently you've never heard of Progeny (Score:5, Informative)
Emphasis on wrong side (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Emphasis on wrong side (Score:1)
The RPM package format has features which DEB does not and vice versa. Current integration usually involves either using alien to convert the packages thereby losing the package format specific features or maintaing 2 seperate databases and losing proper dependency resolution as a result.
That could be a huge advance, if done right. (Score:2)
While they're at it, they could include functionality to install/upgrade/remove from
Now, THAT would be functionality worthy of testing a new system.
If, as it appears, they are only going to add
We've already gotten to the point where individual package managemen
RPM != Red Hat Package Management (Score:1)
For those of you... (Score:2)
I just loaded it yesterday. Very stable and looks to be well supported. The multimedia support is somewhat lacking however.
They'll even send you some pressed CDs for free. (They're even paying the shipping.)
Re:For those of you... (Score:2)
Ubuntu Style Mail Server? (Score:2)
Re:The Real Question (Score:2)
I would preffer if all distros would combine forces instead of introducing *NEW* hot air.
But, I would take this as positive (but still not eye opener) if those three companies would stop 3 to make 1.
Re:The Real Question (Score:1)
Re:The Real Question (Score:2)
Diversity and choice are the main reasons why I use linux. I just love special distros. It is the geeks way. But average users can't fall in this section.
So, somehow...
1. I still hope for one JoeUser (might be even Ubuntu or Fedora, at least the way they are going is the most positive one) distro, that does point JoeUser into a right dirrection and every commercial sector is making their software for by default (as in being treated as default linux distro).
2. I
Re:New? (Score:2)
Re:New? (Score:2)
be more accurate to call at least my main machine a "slackian"
or "debware" box. The basic install is 100% slackware (actually,
I do believe there's still the odd corner here and there left over
from SLS 1.03, but that's another story); but my first reaction if
I need to install something extra is, go to www.debian.org and look
for the debian package. For sheer range of packages and for ease
of finding just what you want on the wbesite, Debian is
Re:New? (Score:2)
Why reinvent the wheel?
Trouble is that you don't know who invents and who reinvents anymore.
Choice and diversity are not always the best case (although I must admit that I love both of them, they are still the leading reasons why I use linux). As much as they mean freedom, they also mean work replication, which automaticaly leads to splitting of work force (for example, zillion of groupware suites but still no calendaring as i
Re:New? (Score:2)
Of course there isn't "one true distribution". BUT... I do still
wonder what exactly is the point at this stage of introducing Yet
Another Linux Distribution. It looks to me like a more or less
desperate attempt to regain lost market share.
Re:New? (Score:2)
No, either they started cooperating in money and workforce or they just wanted free publicity. Others is just as you said. Desperate attempt.
Debian Haiku (Score:1)
Re:"Enterprise" features? (Score:1)
Re:I can hardly wait (Score:1, Redundant)
Re:standard (Score:1)
Re:standard (Score:1)
Linux? Standards? What's that?
{ Typing "man standards", oops, that didn't come with my distro, I better download it. Oops, this download is in .arj format, I can't open it with tar, gunzip, bunzip, unzip, or FileRoller, better download the program that does that...Eek! It seg-faulted on me when I pressed "?" ! How do I use this thing? Better RTFM...oops, the manual is in pdf format so I can't read it with man, info, less, lynx, emacs, links, nano, pico, or zeppo
Your dreams have come true! (Score:3, Funny)
Lesbian is a free operating system (OS) for your computer. An operating system is the set of basic programs and utilities that make your computer run. Lesbian uses the Linux kernel (the core of an operating system), but most of the basic OS tools come from the GNU project; hence the name GNU/Linux.
Lesbian GNU/Linux provides more than a pure OS: it comes with more than 10000 packages, precompiled software bundled up in a nice format for easy install