Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Debian

Debian GNU/Linux 2.1 Released 143

Posted by justin++ from the again! dept.
Debian GNU/Linux 2.1, aka slink, was released last night (again). It contains well over 2500 packages, and packages for GNOME and KDE, though not included in the distro, are available. Intel, Alpha, SPARC, and m68k are the supported architechtures. Potato (2.2) should be frozen shortly. More details and CD order form at netgod.net. Congrats, guys!
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Debian GNU/Linux 2.1 Released More

Debian GNU/Linux 2.1 Released

Comments Filter:
  • Come on, you know there is nothing like that. Quit confusing people with trick questions ;)
  • I don't know why im taking the time to respond to fools like you. But the only reason IBM doesnt invest in redhat is there is no commercial backing. If that is not apparent to you then you are just too stupid for words.
  • No fucking shit you idiot, are you redhat users to stupd to read? I said the only reason they invested in them is because they are a company. Not because there dist is the best.
  • 1.3? man, that is like really old. That's like me going and getting a dos 2.11 install and saying NT4.0 sucks because of it. There is that much difference... well nearly Give 2.1 a try, its really good.

  • I've been looking for gnome 1.0 debs and they don't seem to exist. Can anyone help? I'm assuming that when it said in the article that gnome was available I'm assuming they meant 1.0...

    Thanks guys.
  • I got stuck on it for hours, and had to frob the power switch.

  • TS (Score:1)

    by pohl ( 872 )
    All things being equal, I think I'd rather have a woody and a buzz right now.
  • Why would anyone use vi instead of xedit (or another easy to use editor)? We're just editing text files after all --so why *not* use something easy to use and just ditch vi?


    A term I've seen used to describe this type of difference is Guru Friendly vs. Newbie Friendly. vi's usefulness goes beyond that, though, as it doesn't require a GUI (which is optional) to edit things.

    From the vi editor faq [physics.uch.gr]:
    vi is default visual editor under Unix, and is therefore shipped with all recent version of Unix. (Recent being defined as post 1984 or so.) This means that whenever you run across a machine that is running a Unix of some sort, you will know that you have a powerful editor at your finger tips. Why else? vi is a powerful editor. Also, once you know vi, you can edit files really quickly, as it is extremely economical with the keystrokes. Due to its different modes for inserting and issuing commands, it is much faster than most non-mode based editors. It is also a very small editor. (The version on my machine is 200k) Also, it can do almost anything, as long as you know how to get it to do what you want.
    And, sometimes we're not just editing text-files, we're transforming them, or programming. :) For more vi info, you may want to see the vi lover's homepage [cs.vu.nl]. My favorite vi is vim, btw. :)

  • Potato? (Score:1)

    by robin ( 1321 )

    The distribution names come from characters in Toy Story [imdb.com], presumably because Bruce Perens works for Pixar.


    --
    W.A.S.T.E.
  • I personally use vim (and gvim occasionally) because they start in under 5 seconds. (as opposed to most other [EMACS] editors I've used with similar levels of functionality..)

    Daniel
  • Instead of continuing the pathetic flame, why not contribute something to the discussion? Calling people "luser" is hardly constructive.

    My personal opinion is that the original poster didn't really understand what Debian was, probably because he'd only ever actually used Red Hat. Those who have tried both should be able to come up with better arguments that what amount to "Debian sux".

    Having said that, why do you think Debian users are lusers? It would amaze me if the average Debian user is less technically skilled than the average Red Hat user, so what's your point?
  • A friend of mine recently opened a computer store, and I'm planning on putting up a display of Linux CDS for sale. I figure I'll pick up a bunch of $1.99 cds from Cheapbytes, and sell them for $4-$5.

    I almost bought the cds last week, but I figured I'd wait for Redhat 6.0 and Debian 2.1 (and now BeroLinux)

    Hopefully I'll be able to pull up a few new Linux users in Dedham, MA.

  • Potato? (Score:1)

    by gas ( 2801 )
    Next one is 'Sid'.
  • Yes 2.2.x works fine, but I don't think it's *officially* 2.2 ready, tested and guaranteed to work for everyone and their grandmas c64. Like potato, 'unstable' and 'development version' yes, but it works just great for me.
  • So, what is the proper name for Debian GNU/Hurd?
  • GNOME 1 debs are expected any day now; they'll be available in the "unstable" distribution on Debian FTP sites.
  • please ignore this obvious FUD. as any of the countless people who have installed Debian will tell you, it's always:

    - boot from floppy/HD/network/CD and configure
    - reboot (and since kernels aren't hot-swappable all distributions must reboot at least once to replace the boot kernel with the newly-configured kernel (and to test LILO, boot floppy, etc))
    - dselect to flesh out the system with packages
    - enjoy!

  • I'm using Red Hat 5.2. Why should i switch/not switch to Debian?

    Please: both cons and pros...

  • Sheep (Score:1)

    by Hulver ( 5850 )
    Yeah, lets all use Red Hat because it's the biggest. If everybody had that sort of attitude, Linux wouldn't be the OS it is today, everybody who used a PC would be using Windows.
  • I'd be really hesitant to label the Debian GNOME maintainers as "poor bastards". The simple fact is that there are lots of little pieces related to Gtk+ and GNOME and such, and the maintainers are putting a lot of work into making sure it all works together. So we have a working GNOME that is part of Debian, and not just some random RPMs that the GNOME people put out that may or may not work with other RPMs.

  • lol (Score:1)

    by doobman ( 6198 )
    I really do try to ignore trolls but this is too funny! Ok IBM and co invest in a company to make money. Suits only understand suits, not hackers etc. IBM receives a commercial product by supporting a commercial distro like RH. RH in turn recieves global support from IBM... Life is good. What the hell would IBM (from a suits perspective) gain from investing in a noncommercial distro?

    we really need to stop feeding these trolls after midnight... I really hate irrelevant posts

    doobman
  • ... but I'm glad that there are instructions here [debian.org] about upgrading.

    I'm still a little concerned about using Slink with parallel port printers and kernel 2.2.x. Any documentation on the Debian site?
  • I've got a box running here with an uptime of 312 days (today) it hasent been rebooted since Hamm was installed sometime back in 1998. Over the months the box has been extensively updated and it's now running full potato and shows no signs of wear and tear. The kernel is 2.0.. but my ego over the near 1 year uptime just stops me from upgrading the kernel and doing the evil reboot.


    Long live debian!

    OH, btw dont change the logo, I love the cute ANIME penguin. It rocks more than anything that the gimp ppl came up in that contest.
    --
  • Everyone's favorite vi is vim... unless they're also the type that prefers whips and chains ;)
    .
  • I am not sure if this is a troll or not. I'll assume it is not.

    The Gnome project is actually much larger than Red Hat's involvement. All of the code that Red Hat develops for the project is free. Gnome software had been developed rapidly, and is in a state of turmoil. It has apparantly taken quite a bit of work for the Debian developers to package it. But this is not because RedHat was obfuscating anything. The realtionships between packages in Gnome 1.0 should be clearer, since it is a stable release. It will take quite a bit of work, but the Debian people will get it packaged for Debian 2.1.
  • > I still doubt that I'll be removing my RH 5.2
    > anytime soon (well, except to upgrade to 6.0)

    You have to *remove* RH 5.2 to upgrade it? That sucks, dude.

    SRH
  • If you have a good network connection, you will really appreciate how easy it is to upgrade debian systems. Simply run dselect, select [U]pdate, then [I]nstall. Go to sleep/eat lunch/read slasdot/whatever while dselect does it's thing. No more downloading rpms, figuring out missing dependencies, and repeating as needed!

    Redhat, on the other hand, has put a lot of work into making linux easier to use, such as GUI config tools.

    I really think it comes down to the user/admin of the machine... if it is someone relatively new to linux, go with Redhat... if it is an old unix/linux hack then go with Debian.

    FWIW, I use redhat on my desktop at work, but debian on both of my home systems: an alpha and a powerbook.

  • As a die-hard Debian 'luser,' I must admit that I definitely would not invest in Debian.

    I would definitely (and have) contributed, and made donations.

    I would definitely not pay $50 for RedHat. Why would I do that when I can get a distro equal to or better for free?

    (Hey, I'm not stupid; I can read install HOWTOs)

    I would definitely invest in RedHat stock (if and when they IPO).

    Therefore, I would make money on RedHat's commercial success, in part, by saving $50.

    Lastly, I can run my commercial server using the most secure, reliable, and easily upgradable Debian.

    I'm very happy. PEACE!
  • Debian doesn't release ENOUGH. Debian needs to release MORE.

    Um, no, they shouldn't, at least in my opinion. I like knowing that the machines I keep on the current stable version are nigh bug-free and security-tight.

    And I don't follow how "simpler install" corresponds with some ungodly high load on your laptop. I just yesterday installed a clean 2.1 on a Sparc1 (a new architecture for Debian, though this particular model is 10 years old, and probably slower than your laptop)

    No trouble except one missing symlink in /dev and a setserial error, both which might have been my fault, and have already been reported to the Sparc developers. A base system, X, and ssh inside of 55MB. And no use of the oft-maligned dselect.

    Besides, if you want more cutting-edge stuff, you're more than welcome to ride the unstable tree.

  • I'll start with a few technical pros (and this is specifically for the stable releases):

    1. Upgradability. apt, the new replacement for dselect can let you easily keep your system up to date with the latest fixes for all your installed packages, automatically.

      Let me digress about apt for a bit here. This program kicks much ass. It can pull packages from local filesystems, local CDs, ftp and http mirrors. It automatically determines the latest version of a given piece of software and installs it when you ask. It also installs all packages that your desired package depends upon, and sets them up
      before installing your target package. I have one minor beef in that there appears to be no way of having it automatically install "suggested" or "recommended" packages, just dependent ones, but that's relatively minor.

    2. Bulletproofing. Strong dependency checking means no incompatible libraries, conflicting packages, etc. Lots of testing before a release is considered "stable" means you're not likely to have (or need) as many post-release patches and hotfixes. Yesterday I installed Slink on a 10-year old Sparc1 (new architecture for Debian), and it went nearly flawlessly (the two minor glitches I had are listed elsewhere, and really minor).

    3. Choice. Don't like sendmail? Use smail, exim, zmailer, or try the source package for qmail. Don't like apache? Try roxen, boa, thttpd, or possibly others. Don't want to run through the huge list of available packages? We've got one of those "pick your system's function, and we'll figure out the packages you probably want for it" functions, too.

    4. Lightweight. Hamm installed off 7 floppies into 27MB, and gave you enough to get out on the network and grab anything else you needed. No CDs required, though they're handy.

    Yes, there are political pros and cons, too, but I'll let others flame about them. From a purely technical standpoint, Debian rocks.

  • Both acronyms are correct, supposedly, though presumably one is more correct than the other. Wine does, after all, serve the function of an emulator - to let programs from one kind of system run on another. But then, it -isn't- an emulator in the sense of how it actually works internally.
    Anyway, apparently the Wine developers allow both interpretations of their acronym. I prefer Wine Is Not an Emulator, but, WINdows Emulator is more descriptive if less strictly accurate.

    Parity Bit
  • Agree. I personally like Debian's arrangement best—it has that ``clean'' feeling you only get from people who like doing things that way (somewhat like the feeling you get working on any FSF/GNU software). I've excised all other distributions (except my brother's Thinkpad which is using ZipSlack; I have yet to find anything that stuffs in as nicely as ZipSlack) and gone to pure Debian 2.2-CURRENT (potato).

    <sigh> I'm extremely pleased to see Debian GNU/Hurd. I may just be dedicating a machine to in the near future.

    Cheers,
    Joshua (a soon-to-be patron of Saint IGNUcius)

  • They all use Linux Kernels, and related drivers. I
    haven't noticed any difference in stability between SuSE and Red Hat, and Debian, and Slack..... and on and on. IT'S ALL GOOD

  • Well!

    Already Donwloaded the Images (Relly well from UK to Spain), burned the CD's, and installed at home with something like ... 0.0 problems.

    A whole O.S. plus tons of applications, from the Net to my home PC (which is not connected to the net)in few hours ...

    I'll share those 'still warm' Cd's with all my mates at work so they can also feel the power of linux.

    Thanks to all the Debian developers/contributors for that Really Good Work.

    M*
  • The reason IBM went with Red Hat has nothing to do with quality but with support contracts. The Debian crew are all volunteers. Business customers like to have the option to call someone when something breaks (even if they never have to).

    Come on people, think before you post and try not to turn everything into a war between Red Hat and everyone or Gnome and KDE.

    Andrew
  • Having some trouble here, thought someone here might be able to help out. I am trying to install redhat 5.2 from a cd i burned, and when it trys to detect my cd, the cdrom drive itself locks up (won't open) and the install program stalls. i then tried copying the redhat/base and redhat/rpms dirs to my win98 partition but when setup tries to scan the packages, it gives an error opening directory or something. can anyone offer me some relief? if not, can anyone tell me how i can download do a basic install of debian 2.1 and make it go out on the internet and download everything else? and if that's not feasible, what all do i need to download to create a CD?

    Thanks!
    Mark Duch
  • Ok but what do I need to download and put on floppies to get a basic install with PPP support?
  • Maybe the mirror really is bad, or maybe you just have packages left from hamm whose names were changed and no one set 'conflicts' for the replacement. It happened to me, about 8 packages that turned out to be just old.

    Why not use kernel-package to handle the kernel? You still configure everything as before, but it creates a .deb that dpkg can install and uninstall. More info: http://www.debian.org/doc/FAQ/debian-faq-11.html#s s11.1
  • Well, at least it's different.

  • Bonsai (Score:1)

    by Beef ( 19842 )
    Does this distribution support themes?
  • Yeah, maybe this Debian release will take fewer than four reboots to install completely. BTW, Redhat is completely installed on one boot cycle.

Slashdot Top Deals

I've noticed several design suggestions in your code.

Close