Mandriva Linux 2008 Now Available 189
AdamWill writes "Mandriva Linux 2008 is now available for download on the official site and on the network of public mirror servers. In 2008 you will find KDE 3.5.7 and the new GNOME 2.20 already integrated, a solid kernel 2.6.22.9 with fair scheduling support, OpenOffice.org 2.2.1, cutting-edge 3D-accelerated desktop courtesy of Compiz Fusion 0.5.2, Mozilla Firefox 2.0.0.6, and everything else you've come to expect. We have integrated a reworked hardware detection sub-system, with support for a lot of new devices (particularly graphics cards, sound cards, and wireless chips). There is a wizard to import Windows documents and settings, a new network configuration center, and a set of improvements to the Mandriva software management tools. Read about the new features in depth in the release tour, or view the release notes. The One installation CD is the recommended download: it comes with a full KDE desktop and application suite, NVIDIA and ATI proprietary video card drivers, Intel wireless firmware, Adobe Flash and Sun Java browser plugins, all included."
Link leads to archive (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Link leads to archive (Score:5, Informative)
What happened to Matisse? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What happened to Matisse? (Score:4, Insightful)
Before you reply, bear in mind Compiz was around months before Vista.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Amazingly enough, nobody ripped anybody else off. Compositing is a fairly obvious idea. As the technology to implement it became available, it was implemented, by all the major operating systems.
FILM AT 11!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
IMO, the linux GUI has been ahead of windows for a long time. Look at X-forwarding, virtual desktops, window shading, always-on-top. None of these things work in windows.
Re: (Score:2)
Linux desktop apps get criticized for their GUI every time they do something different.
Actually, it has been my experience that apps only tend to be criticised if they do something different from the usual way arbitrarily; for no good reason or 'just to be different'. Since the original way is often that way for a good reason, this tends to result in a worse interface than what would have resulted if the implementers just copied what people actually schooled in UI design were doing. Even if there is no usability advantage to one way or the other (as is often the case with keyboard shortcut
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Admittedly, many of the composite features are similar to what's been available in MacOSX for a while, but it's hardly a ripoff of Exposé.
Re: (Score:2)
Compiz and Beryl came way before Vista's release, buster.
That might have been a relevent comment if Microsoft, like Apple, were reticent and secretive about their products until their release.
But since Microsoft have been showing off their Longhorn desktop compositor since Winhec 2003 (Videos [extremetech.com], including "Beryl-style" floppy windows; not to mention with gratuitous numbers of leaked Longhorn alphas), several years before Beryl and Compiz; it's a bit cheeky to stand there and claim that since Vista didn't go gold until 2007, it was copying the *nix implementations
Re: (Score:2)
Ubuntu (Score:4, Insightful)
Mandriva used to be one of the only 'gratuis' distros which had a nice desktop by default
didn't it pioneer the way towards 'point and click', 'just working'?
Re:Ubuntu (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
You never actually had to do that to install software on Mandrake / Mandriva, though some people got the idea that they did. Ever since the very early releases Mandriva has had a dependency resolving package manager, urpmi, and a proper set of online repositories.
In my experience urpmi has always worked very well. The only (very minor) gripes I had with Mandrake the numerous times I used it were the configuration tools that were less than stellar at times (although as expected, they got better with each release) and the fact that they often shipped brittle apps in order to be on the bleeding edge (which is a choice after all).
But I've never had any dependency issues. urpmi always worked just fine. OTOH if you just use RPM, I guess YMMV.
Nowadays I tend to use Kubunt
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I constantly see this touted. I've tried various distributions with different package formats. Frankly I found debian to be the exact same as RPM based systems. Both have their problems. Both have their advantages. Both have pretty much the exact same problems, differing only in implementation details. IMO, to say one is better or worse based only on the package format is to be ignorant of the subject matter. Heck, I actually had a harder time managing packages on debi
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Or you can go for the smaller sized packages listings, but then you get pretty much no information as to what one package is.
I wish they'd do something about it. It does make me look longingly the debian-based distros way each and every time I want to install something I mostly can't use the CLI for.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you stick to the distro's official repositories, life tends to be simple. It's when you want something thats not in the official repositories, and you decide to add other repositories that life starts to get complicated and unpredictable.
Pretty much, I think its better to stay with the official repositories, then use source tarballs to get the shiny new stuff. The "convenience" of non-official repositories isn't worth the trouble.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I appreciate that you say that you haven't used an RPM based distro for several years. I think you'd find if you tried one now that the tools (such as YUM [duke.edu] and PUP [fedoraproject.org] and SMART [zorked.net]) simplify package managament greatly. When you add to this that the quality and quantity of RPM packaging (now 5000 packages for Fedora [redhat.com]) is going up there really isn't much of a case to make for debs and distros based on them being superior. Add to this that there are examples of "Deb-hell" if you look for them [linuxchix.org].
The reason that debs u
Re: (Score:2)
No, we're not. We release on a six month cycle, and always have, except for 2007 which came on a one year cycle as an experiment. Excepting that release, we've released around every April and every October since before Ubuntu existed.
Maybe Ubuntu initially chose to do all their releases slightly after ours in order to try and capitalize on the buzz created by each Mandriva release
64 bits? (Score:4, Interesting)
I can't tell if my inability to find the 64-bit version of One or Free is due to their confusing site design, my incompetence, or because those versions don't actually exist. Several places on their site say that all versions are available from "the official download site": http://www.mandriva.com/archives/ [mandriva.com] But there's no indication there at all of how to get the 64-bit versions (at least, not at the time I'm writing this). I can't say that I'm impressed by the apparent lack of internal coordination on their website for this release: several links point to the Spring 2007 edition as still being current.
I hate to draw the conclusion that this is (yet) one more sign of Mandriva's decreasing relevance, but I would be very surprised if Ubuntu's upcoming release exhibited any of these kinds of quirks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Mind you, I can't find a way to download the DVD version anyway. I must have the wrong kind of mind to grasp the organization of their site.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:64 bits? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I've been totally impressed with the 2007.1 (Spring)
It's a little more complete then Ubuntu, is closer to the Red-Hat we use where I work, and has a much improved package management system.
Also, the ATI drivers are good and the hardware compatibility has been at least as good as Ubuntu in my experience. T
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Faster to trash your machine, yeah.
Re:64 bits? (Score:4, Informative)
Mandriva definitely went through some growing pains. Okay, okay, it was growing leprosy. The three releases prior to 2007 had some real crufty bugs and lots of things which just didn't work right. These problems brought into question the viability of the entire distribution. Since 2007, they have finally come full circle and now offer a high quality, robust (fat) distribution, like what originally made them popular. The 2007.1 release only continued to improve and polish.
Don't be afraid to try Mandriva. I've tried many different distributions and went elsewhere during their dark days, but I came back. Personally I like it much better than Fedora and especially Red Hat. I consider in on par with Ubuntu for package completeness. And the wizards is a real bonus for most inexperienced users.
Re: (Score:2)
go to www.mandriva.com
Step 2:
click on the giant green button that says Download
Advice on how we could make it easier is very welcome.
2007, 2008? (Score:4, Insightful)
Sorry, car analogy.
I hope this isn't the same as RC1 (Score:3, Interesting)
Improvements? (Score:3, Interesting)
I hope by "improvements," they mean returning some of the functionality the software management tools used to have. There was a time when the software manager would give you basic information, like the total number of packages selected and their sizes, overall progress etc. Then, a couple of releases back, all of that info disappeared. There may be a way of getting "verbose" output, but the default is decidedly minimalist.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You get a list of packages that have updates available, pre-checked for your convenience, but no info on their size.
Selecting Update starts the downloads. A dialog box pops up - stealing focus, btw - and shows the total size of the file currently being downloaded as well as the progress, but it doesn't tell you how many more files re
Default desktop is extremely ugly (Score:5, Interesting)
http://wiki.mandriva.com/en/uploads/9/9a/2008-kde-desktop.png [mandriva.com]
I realize this is a matter of personal taste, and that one can easily alter the look of the desktop, but still... I challenge someone to claim that the taskbar and menu-button look nice. Even the easter bunny wouldn't pick that light pastel blue as a default color. First impressions do matter.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ubuntu took their market share easily thanks to tremendously foolish management mistakes with the Mandrake/Mandriva distro. I think the gap is just widening even more now.
Package repositories? (Score:2)
I'm genuinely curious. One of the main things that has kept me from both Fedora and Mandriva is the package management/repositories of Debian-based systems. I just cannot live without that anymore. I mean, software might be available in RPM format, but then you have to hunt dependencies yourself. No thank you. And last time I tried, it was possible to get repository-like functionality via tools like yum, but you still had to track down a thousand different repositories (the safety of which was typically unk
Re:Package repositories? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Package repositories? (Score:4, Informative)
No. No, you don't, and you haven't for several years, as I said. Please read:
http://wiki.mandriva.com/en/Docs/Basic_tasks/Installing_and_removing_software [mandriva.com]
it explains it all rather clearly.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, software might be available in RPM format, but then you have to hunt dependencies yourself.
This hasn't been true if you stick to the official repositories for any major distribution for a while now. Granted, if you wander off into the wilds and just start installing rpm's you found on sourceforge, you might start having some work on your hands, but I haven't stumbled into RPM hell myself for quite a while.
YMMV (and keep in mind that .0 on any dist release is just askin' for trouble)
Re: (Score:2)
but you still had to track down a thousand different repositories
Not true. I'm only using the official mandriva repositories, and everything I need is in there, no need to use other repositories.
Do you still have to hunt for 3 hours on the interwebs to figure out how to install anything that didn't come with the dis
That's great and all... (Score:2)
... but is it as good as Amiga 5?
I Like Mandriva (Score:2, Insightful)
Bring a Sadwitch if you're upgrading... (Score:2)
Presently I've completed the upgrade to 2008, sadly now I have only one monitor working (out of a dual head setup), no applications under KDE (woo, lets pla
Re: (Score:2)
Several things... (Score:2)
Re:Several things... (Score:4, Insightful)
First, as has been explained several times in this thread, there is absolutely zero point in including Firefox 2.0.0.7, as the only change in 2.0.0.7 is a fix which is entirely irrelevant to Linux.
OpenOffice.org 2.3.0 was released on September 18th. That is not 'a while'. We were already in the Release Candidate stage at that point. Would you expect Microsoft to do a major version update of, say, Windows Media Player or Internet Explorer between Vista RC2 and Vista final? Of course not.
"The few pieces of software that have pre-compiled downloadable Linux versions still need at least three different types of packages just to cover "most" of the popular Linux distros"
This is because the idea of having pre-compiled downloadable Linux versions is, frankly, silly. The package management system works best when people understand it, and worst when they try to do end runs around it. This is not surprising. Software writers should write, and packagers (who work for individual distros) should package. That system works great. It's when people start messing with it that you get problems.
"And then we wonder why nobody bothers to develop for "Linux""
We do? Can't say I find myself kept up at night wondering about that. Maybe because lots of people *do* develop for Linux. It's simple - release source code.
"And there is no single clear-cut procedure for installing software completely outside of the native package management system in a way that neither will ever interfere with the other."
Why do you want one? What's wrong with the package management system?
"Good God, when I think of all the man-hours that are being wasted with all this idiotic redundancy, and all the time spent by users complaining in forums that their distro-of-choice doesn't have the latest version of package X yet because the package maintainer is on vacation, it makes my head hurt."
Then go think about something else and quit trolling Linux threads. Good lord, if anyone's wasting their time around here it's you.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you want one? What's wrong with the package management system?
Nothing, since autopackage came along.
Its just a shame that no-one appears to use it, leading to issues like your current truecrypt woes, or the Unreal 2004 installer requiring tweaks to get UT2004 running on Mandriva.
BTW, you must try alot harder to be patient with those you suspect are trolls. Many of them are genuinely frustrated users, and a Mandriva representative coming across all 'spiky' and 'French' doesnt show your company in a good light. You really must treat them kindly, saying 'there, there
Re: (Score:2)
Truecrypt woes? Do elaborate.
"Unreal 2004 installer"
there's your problem. as I wrote in my original message.
Re: (Score:2)
Truecrypt woes? Do elaborate.
:)
"Unreal 2004 installer"
there's your problem. as I wrote in my original message.
Truecrypt.
I recently moved to truecrypt for my backup external disk (for a host of reasons, but primarily portability). urpmi truecrypt failed, some reading led me to urpmi realcrypt, which failed. So I went to the source. Which required kernel-source (and not the stripped version either). So thats a 200Mb download. On each PC. Followed by a compile taking 20 minutes.
On the first PC it took about 1 hour to get from urpmi truecrypt to installed, and required me to exercise extreme cleverness to understan
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck using autopackage for something that require modifications in the kernel !
Re: bells and whistles (Score:4, Informative)
Okay, so most people put it in for "I can make my windows do silly transitions", and it would be better if more functionality were added instead, but the eye candy can be the basis for functionality as well
Re: (Score:2)
Where were you when Windows replaced DOS?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
win.com? Are you sure about that? I don't have any real memories of Windows pre-3.x but unless I've completely forgotten about assembly programming .com executables are limited to 64 kiB and I can't really imagine any version of Windows fitting into that, especially not with all the constraints (64 kiB is total size including stack and all that stuff, not just the size of the executable stored on disk). But hey, maybe I'm wrong and I'm sure someone will point out how and why.. :)
/Mikael
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I know that Windows 3.x had a file called win.exe which was AFAICR (As Far As I Can Remember) the actual executable. Anyway, I checked my facts and Windows 1.0 required 256 kiB of RAM and a .com executable is limited to a total footprint of 64 kiB (one segment) so that kind of makes it hard for Windows to require more RAM than it can use...
/Mikael
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, go to Hell. (Score:5, Informative)
Linux has Active Directory authentication out of the box, an easy front end to ndiswrapper, an easy method for adding Internet software repositories. I really hate this guy. e all work so hard and he tramples on everything we have done.
Mark my words, I will see you using a Linux Desktop yet!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
LDAP is just the icing on the cake (Hell, I use NIS for my auth...)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
What is the deal with every single large distro out there incorporating 3d acelerated desktops and shining bells and whistles as the main features in all new releases? Sadly, this says mush about the state of computing today
I see you were flagged as a troll. It is too bad the /. scoring people don't see a valid post when it is staring them in the face.
Though I prefer Linux to Wintendo (and use it on my home machines) you have a point. Much of what has been hyped in the latest Linux distros is eye-candy effects. This is similar to my experience with Wintendo Vista. All eye-candy and no real useful features. I have tried Compiz - and went back to plain old KDE. I have also tried Vista and went and upgraded to SUSE 10.2.
Fort
Re: (Score:2)
What else is there to improve?
Re: (Score:2)
Speed, speed, and more speed.
Re:Non-Free (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Am I angry that I crash ? not really. I can turn off Compiz and run the standard window manager and be stable.. then I can turn it back on and get an idea what
Re: (Score:2)
I started Linux with Mandriva 9.1, then later used 10.1 and 2007. They slowly got things working better in some ways, but every major release meant tons of important broken packages. In 2007, Firestarter, XEphem and Gweled were quite completely broken, as I remember it. Setting up my Wacom tablet meant huge headaches every major release. They never got a decent package management system (rpmdrake is a huge pain to use; dependency hell was all over the place, the GUI quite often didn't actually select the pa
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I installed 2007 Spring as my fist linux distro in 5 years. Mandriva auto detected everythign and set it up. My Wireless and sound worked out of the box. Not something I can say for Ubuntu. Ubuntu was a PITA to get wireless working. And I never got sound working on Ubuntu. That alone was a deal maker for me. I don't want to mess around for hours trying to get stuff to work. I jsut want it to work. I actually like Mandriva better than XP for internet/o
Re:transitionary distro? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Generic intel sound/wireless stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Why wouldn't it come with the latest version of Firefox, 2.0.0.7?
Because the people who compile and package the distro from source need to draw a line somewhere, and test for proper functionality with what they have.
If they kept updating distro packages every time a minor thing changes before release, there would never be time for any real testing, and overall quality would suffer.
Bleeding Edge... (Score:2, Informative)
However, if you're adventurous and would like to build your own Linux box with all bleeding-edge components, you could try the guidelines posted on the "Linux From Scratch" website (not an endorsement, just a place to start):
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/ [linuxfromscratch.org]
Re:Outdated Firefox? (Score:4, Informative)
Prob w/ QuickTime, not Firefox per se... (Score:2, Informative)
It should be noted that a careful reading of the advisory does not make any mention of the vulnerability being related to the use of Firefox per se, but rather to the use of QuickTime in conjunction with Firefox.
The vulnerability allows an attacker to use a specially crafted QuickTime object to launch the default browser within Windows. This implies that the initial vulnerability resides within QuickTime, and is supported by the following:
This vulnerability is compounded, however, by the ability to la
Re:Outdated Firefox? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Is this nagging supposed to be an expression of thanks for my contribution? Shucks. Why don't I feel properly thankful for the invitation to waste more time "validating" a broken moderation system? Can you get it through your head that my point is that the moderation system is *NOT* functioning properly. It is a censorious poison that is destroy
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm Adam Williamson, my official tagline reads:
Mandriva community representative | Bugmaster | Community newsletter editor | Proofreader | Packager
basically, I have SVN and SSH access to break just about the entire company, and none of the required formal training to use it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)