Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Debian 6.0 Released In GNU/Linux, FreeBSD Flavors

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the right-on-time dept.

Debian 250

itwbennett writes "After two years of work, the Debian Project has announced the release of Debian 6.0. 'There are many goodies in Debian 6.0 GNU/Linux, not the least of which is the new completely free-as-in-freedom Linux kernel, which no longer contains firmware modules that Debian developers found troublesome,' says blogger Brian Proffitt. And in addition to Debian GNU/Linux, Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is introduced as a technology preview. 'Debian GNU/kFreeBSD will port both a 32- and 64-bit PC version of the FreeBSD kernel into the Debian userspace, making them the first Debian release without a Linux kernel,' says Proffitt. 'The Debian Project is serious about the technology preview label, though: these FreeBSD-based versions will have limited advanced desktop features.' The release notes and installation manual have been posted, and installation images may be downloaded right now via bittorrent, jigdo, or HTTP."

cancel ×

250 comments

First Trout! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35117714)

I am a Debian-using fish!

to put it bluntly.... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35117726)

FUCK YEAH!

Re:to put it bluntly.... (0)

arivanov (12034) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118922)

Fuck no

Does not hibernate on PowerMAC - I need to refile this one, the bloody BTS bounced it
Sound on powermac does not work
Wifi on cheap RTL based adapters does not work
Kernel throws kernel-level malloc failures on GigE if you get a fast enough card and no swap

Granted that is not as bad completely broken NFS which was the previous release, but still not where Debian used to be.

I am going to wait for R1 this time, no thanks

All (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35117736)

All hail the almighty Debian Overlords :)
BTW .... posting this on a fresh installed Debian 6 System .... it rocks :D

NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (3, Interesting)

aaaaaaargh! (1150173) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117750)

I used to run NetBSD on an old PP Mac booted from a zip drive in the nineties. It was running great but since then I haven't looked at it again. I know that the 3 free BSDs (open-, free- and net-) are security audited and support old hardware very well. But I wonder what advantages the kernel itself brings. So my potentially stupid questionis:

What's the advantage of running Debian with a BSD kernel instead of linux?

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (1)

aaaaaaargh! (1150173) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117756)

A well, FreeBSD kernel is what I've meant, of course...sorry!

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35117772)

ZFS and DTrace come to mind, but those are only the easy examples.

FTFY (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117852)

ZFS and DTrace come to mind, but those are the only easy examples.

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (3, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118906)

Working, in-kernel, low-latency, sound mixing is another one. No messing around with portaudio or ALSA, sound Just Works(tm).

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35117786)

What's the advantage of running Debian with a BSD kernel instead of linux?

Contrarian Hipster factor? You get to say in your Sperrys, skin tight pants, tattoos, and cheesy mustache, "I'm running the BSD kernel. It's sorta like OSX only I'm not paying into the corporatistic American system." .

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (1)

MrLint (519792) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118186)

Considering that companies seem to have difficulty of dealing with the code publication surrounding the Linux they use in their products, it has always befuddled me as to why they didn't 'just use' BSD instead.

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (5, Insightful)

rtfa-troll (1340807) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118356)

... it has always befuddled me as to why they didn't 'just use' BSD instead.

To be honest, believing exactly the argument you gave companies mostly they did until the last few years. However, you never knew about out because they didn't publish the code. The reason for this is that there is no need to and if they do release their code, their competitors can use it, so their lawyers advise them against. After a few years they either get so wildly successful (JunOS / OSX / Microsoft TCP/IP stack) that they keep their own completely proprietary branch and never help anyone else or they get abandoned (IPSO / AlchemOS / BSDi / SunOS / etc. etc.)

The thing is, that the because of the effects of copyleft, the Linux people cooperate and release code and so, even though the resources put into Linux are much less, there is less duplication and so more is achieved. This has become much more visible recently with Android and other successes and means that corporate types have begun to see copyleft as a platform which makes limited cooperation with potential competitors possible and safe.

If you are choosing a system for your own platform, this becomes a good reason to choose an AGPLv3 base as much as possible and, if you have any proprietry code, layer that separately on top. Your work on the commodity underlying components can be safely released and will move forward with the rest of the community. Whatever investment you put in will be preserved instead of becoming obsolete.

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118598)

Android isn't a particularly good example a they made their own fork and aren't contributing anything back. And even if companies do use linux, they can (and do) lock it down. They can (and do) use binary blob drivers for important parts

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118946)

Android isn't a particularly good example a they made their own fork and aren't contributing anything back.

Sad but true. But I guess none of us should be surprised at the presence and actions of freeloaders.

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (1, Flamebait)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117800)

What's the advantage of running Debian with a BSD kernel instead of linux?

If you want to make money, and don't want to contribute back to the free software economy, its easier with a BSD license than a GPL license. Other than that...

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118138)

What's the advantage of running Debian with a BSD kernel instead of linux?

If you want to make money, and don't want to contribute back to the free software economy, its easier with a BSD license than a GPL license. Other than that...

Quite an oversimplification.

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (2, Informative)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118354)

What's the advantage of running Debian with a BSD kernel instead of linux?

If you want to make money, and don't want to contribute back to the free software economy, its easier with a BSD license than a GPL license. Other than that...

Quite an oversimplification.

Yet, not bad for just 27 words. If you can do better given that constraint... A laundry list of unique features, license differences, and the (very few) device drivers that work better under BSD than linux, would probably be too long and complicated to be a "summary".

I would go further and state its within the set of questions where if you are able to successfully implement the answer, you are capable enough not to need to ask us the question, or alternately its within the set of questions where if you actually needed to know the answer, you would have already figured it out via very hard experience on linux, although knowing it is a bad question in advance would probably have been impossible because it would have taken more data to evaluate the question than to answer it...

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (1)

clydemaxwell (935315) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118718)

your defense of your oversimplification: "yeah, but it's simple!"

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118408)

That's a terrible understatement of what BSD is. All BSD flavours are separate operating systems with multiple pros and cons compared to GNU/Linux. This applies to them as a whole, and to their kernel. For one, the BSD kernel supports ZFS natively, without ZFS-FUSE that is required on Linux. I'm not sure if Debian GNU/kFreeBSD supports that, but it's something Linux can't do yet, and FreeBSD's kernel can. And that's only one of the gazillion differences.

The difference in licenses is also more important than what you said. Copyleft's aim is much bigger than attempting to stop commercial projects that don't want to contribute back. In fact, that's not its aim at all. The lack of copyleft has a much bigger impact than that, for one it allows better compatibility between free software components, for example it allows you to combine BSD and ZFS legally (which is problematic with GPL).

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (1)

Chemisor (97276) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118442)

So why is ZFS the only feature ever mentioned? I don't care about ZFS, only servers want that. What does BSD have that normal people want?

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (3, Interesting)

Joe Jay Bee (1151309) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118702)

One of the things I appreciate most about it is the proper OSS sound support, with mixing that actually works out of the box without having to deal with shit like PulseAudio or the clusterfuck that is Alsa.

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (3, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118916)

So why is ZFS the only feature ever mentioned? I don't care about ZFS, only servers want that

Indeed. There are absolutely no use cases for ZFS that aren't on the server. For example, no average user would want easy-to-use snapshots - being able to easily revert a file from an earlier version is a server-only feature. They definitely wouldn't want to be able to do simple incremental backups just by streaming the disk changes with something like zfs send / receive - only server users care about that. Data integrity is probably an enterprise feature too - no one on a desktop wants checksums in their data, because data loss only matters to enterprise users.

Compelled by FSF diff than by church or gov't? (2, Insightful)

perpenso (1613749) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118764)

What's the advantage of running Debian with a BSD kernel instead of linux?

If you want to make money, and don't want to contribute back to the free software economy, its easier with a BSD license than a GPL license. Other than that...

That's a somewhat FUD'ish response. There are plenty of BSD users who contribute back. I'd say that one advantage is that you don't have a 3rd party (FSF) dictating terms to you, in particular a 3rd party that is on a quasi-religious campaign. I know the FSF claims otherwise, but they are not the free'er license. Restriction are restrictions, whether or not those restrictions have a socially beneficial goal and are altruistic. As GPL v3 introduced some controversy and drama, what will GPL v4 introduce. Some may not want to have to deal with it.

Now I realize some GPL fans are probably feeling their emotions rise and some zealots have already stopped reading and have started composing their flames :-), but if a church or government was compelling you to do good and altruistic things would you consider that freedom? Why is being compelled by the FSF any different?

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (5, Informative)

bk2204 (310841) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117908)

You can find some of the reasons here [debian.org] . Among them are ZFS, jails, and pf. I've used Debian GNU/kFreeBSD in the past and found pf significantly easier to use than iptables and tc.

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (2)

snookiex (1814614) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118090)

They also point to a benchmark [phoronix.com] made in Phoronix. here is an excerpt from the conclusions:

Of the 27 tests that were carried out with our first Debian GNU/kFreeBSD benchmarking session, in 18 of the tests Debian GNU/Linux 32-bit was faster than Debian GNU/kFreeBSD 32-bit. However, with many of those 18 wins, the GNU/kFreeBSD results were very close to the GNU/Linux numbers. With the 64-bit versions, Debian GNU/Linux did even better and was in front 23 of the 27 times compared to 64-bit Debian GNU/kFreeBSD. These 64-bit results were certainly quite interesting and it looks like the FreeBSD kernel can be better tuned for a 64-bit environment. Debian GNU/kFreeBSD 64-bit though did have strong advantages with the x264, 7-Zip, and Gcrypt CEMLLIA256-ECB Cipher tests over the Linux kernel.

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (2, Funny)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118230)

It's kind of funny that you talk about jails being an advantage ... from your link:

the upcoming reiserfs and xfs, or

definitely jailed, and a real killer :-)

... but don't you think you could come up with something a bit more recent? Linux has changed a bit since then.

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (3, Informative)

Morth (322218) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118404)

Are they using glibc or the freebsd one? Because one of the developer advantages of the BSDs are that kernel and libc are more in sync. Ie. there's no system calls in libc that are not in the kernel, and vice versa.

Re:NetBsd kernel...what's the advantage? (2)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118776)

I like those advantages. What I really want to know is what the disadvantages are. Is all my software likely to work on Debian FreeBSD?

Well done! (2)

cavok (154569) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117754)

Thanks to all the involved people, we have another cornerstone of the Free Software.

Good job Debian team (4, Informative)

JackieBrown (987087) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117758)

This looks like a solid release. I only use stable for as long as it takes for the new queue to start start dumping back in Sid but I appreciate the hard work that has gone into this.

And the new artwork really rocks. I was shocked to see plymouth working out of the box with my nvidia card. The consistency from grub to kde launch is really stunning and makes the whole bootup feel seamless.

I love it! (3, Insightful)

no known priors (1948918) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117764)

I'm a Ubuntu user, but I know where it comes from. Debian has been the dream operating system of mine for ages. Easy to install thousands of packages, stable, safe, etc. The only trouble is, when I first tried to install it in 2007, I couldn't get it to work with my wireless card. Ubuntu just worked. I'm going to guess that it wouldn't work now either; my wireless card is one of those Intel ones with the locked up firmware so that I don't start spamming the airwaves... (If I recall correctly the software is ipw2200 [debian.org] , or similar.)

Anyway, one thing I note from the press release, is that it is still including OpenOffice.org 3.2.1. I wonder when they'll get LibreOffice (Ubuntu will get it in the 11.4 release).

Great job Debian!

Re:I love it! (2)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117816)

I'm going to guess that it wouldn't work now either... (If I recall correctly the software is ipw2200 [debian.org] , or similar.)

So, you bothered to link to a page explaining in extreme detail both that it works, and exactly how to do it line by line, but you're guessing it wouldn't work?

I think you're trying to write in a very complicated manner that you're not sure if your laptop has a ipw2200? I have second hand knowledge that the instructions on the wiki do work quite well if you're unfortunate enough to own a ipw2200 card.

Re:I love it! (1)

no known priors (1948918) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117882)

Eeh, two things. 1) I'm not sure what card I have, it just works at install time in Ubuntu. 2) I meant that I'm not sure that it would work at install time, I guess I should have been more specific. And I didn't actually bother reading that page, so...

At the time, early 2007, I had wireless-only Internet access at my then home ("a mental asylum -- old", I like to say), and I had to go at least five KMs to get wired Internet access. I downloaded Debian using MS Windows, installed it at home, and then fuxed around trying to get wireless to work in a library a long way from home. In the end I just downloaded and installed Ubuntu, and it just worked. And, apart from a few minor hiccups every now and again, it continues to just work.

It maybe that Debian would also "just work" now (assuming I could get wireless to work), but two things prevent me from trying it. I've become accustomed to having frequent updates to everything (yes, unstable, yes), and I can't be bothered messing around with the guts of my OS any more. I'm past those days.

Re:I love it! (2)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118260)

I'm not sure what card I have, it just works at install time in Ubuntu.

pop open a terminal, "lsmod | grep ipw2100" if you see something you have a 2100. "lsmod | grep ipw2200" if you see something you have a 2200.

Take a look at the output of dmesg, it'll probably have a lot of verbal sorta-english commentary on your wireless card.

If I knew more Ubuntu, I could probably tell you how to figure out which firmware files it has installed and loaded.

Does it count as a "google hack" to flip the laptop over, find the model number, and google for that and the words "debian install" or "linux wifi"? Maybe that would be too elite for the average "google hack".

An interesting addition to future releases would be some kind of "as it boots" analyzer to grep for known troublesome devices and provide commentary, such as that wiki URL if certain strings are seen in dmesg or lspci. For all I know, d-installer already has that, I haven't installed in quite awhile (Debian being one of the few (only?) OS available in the entire computational world where upgrading from previous releases just works)

Re:I love it! (4, Insightful)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117896)

That's the whole reason Ubuntu exists though, for people who lack the time or ability or whatever to just install and configure Debian (which exists for people who lack the time or ability or whatever to just build gentoo, which exists for people who lack time or ability or whatever to just create their own private distro from scratch, which of course is for people who lack time or ability or whatever to just go ahead and code their own custom OS using vi or emacs...).

Re:I love it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35117928)

Emacs is an OS. All it lacks is a decent editor.

Re:I love it! (1)

the Atomic Rabbit (200041) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118018)

Wow, how original.

Re:I love it! (1)

chichilalescu (1647065) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118056)

which of course is for people who lack the time or ability to just go ahead and setup the universe properly [xkcd.com] ...

(I know, I'm just being a parasite, but I couldn't resist)

Re:I love it! (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118782)

Why do you need another OS if you already are running emacs?

Re:I love it! (1)

asvravi (1236558) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118838)

vi or emacs?

Re:I love it! (1)

potHead42 (188922) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118854)

using vi or emacs...

Which of course is for people who lack time or ability or whatever to use ed.

Re:I love it! (2, Interesting)

Seumas (6865) | more than 3 years ago | (#35119044)

In other words (from personal experience):

Slackware, Gentoo, Debian, etc - are especially great if you're a young geek who has plenty of time to enjoy debugging and playing with everything to get the simplest functionality out of your system (like sound or the right resolution to display properly on your screen).

Ubuntu is especially great if you're an older geek and you need to be doing actual work rather than spending two entire weeks figuring out why an obvious LineMode configuration isn't working and your screen resolution is still totally screwed despite it and fighting against countless hurdles to get sound cards working properly with all of your applications, etc.

Both are entirely valid and I wish I had more time in my life to keep being the first guy, but many (and it's growing every day) need to spend less time configuring and tweaking and working around bugs in linux and more time doing our actual work or projects (or working on our own bugs in our own software).

Debian was my first real linux, about twelve years ago. It powered a really big project that I ran for more than a decade, almost flawlessly. Development can be glacial and Debian foundation bureaucracy can be navel-gazing and counter-productive . . . but god damn, the outcome is something to aspire to. And now, I can get a lot of that with someone else's spit and polish in Ubuntu.

Gentoo, on the other hand. Well, it's good that there's a linux-based outlet for obsessive compulsives. :P

Re:I love it! (3, Interesting)

mmj638 (905944) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117842)

it is still including OpenOffice.org 3.2.1. I wonder when they'll get LibreOffice

Debian's OpenOffice uses patches from Go-OO (now merging with LibreOffice) anyway, so in some ways it is already more similar to LibreOffice than to stock OpenOffice.org. It opens .docx documents very well, for example.

This is also true of Ubuntu's, and generally other distros' OpenOffice packages.

LibreOffice itself came into existence too late for an actual LibreOffice version to make it into Debian 6.0.

I expect it will be a smooth and uncontroversial transition from Debian 6.0's Go-OO enhanced OpenOffice to Debian 7.0's LibreOffice. I'm guessing they'll no longer use the OpenOffice.org branding for that particular variation of it though.

Re:I love it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35117864)

The firmware may be in the non-free section of the repositories. Non-free is not included by default, but it can be included if you want it, so I would suggest that the chance of this release (with non-free) installing for you is higher than you imagine.

The wiki page you linked to even states "It's now also available in the nonfree-firmware tarball which we build regularly on cdimage.debian.org. Supply this blob on a CD/floppy/USB drive etc. and d-i will do the right thing." So I'd say your chances might actually be quite good.

Re:I love it! (1)

ffreeloader (1105115) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118170)

Yeah, you just need to run the "expert" installation routine to get to it.

To others reading this, don't let the "expert" tag fool you. All it does is give you more options to choose from, if you want them. If you don't want/understand the options you can still use the same defaults the "regular" install routine uses within the "expert" install routine.

Re:I love it! (1)

Longshanks197 (217398) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118554)

Any installation that requires additional firmware will need to have the firmware available during installation. See the Debian wiki http://wiki.debian.org/Firmware [debian.org] for installation instructions. They even have a special netinst image that will pull the correct firmware.

As for LibreOffice, it is in the experimental archive and I would imagine will be in sid very soon. Of course it won't hit stable until 7.0 but most desktop users aren't going to wait that long. Especially if/when sid gets a 2.6.38 kernel with the new 200 line patch.

kFreeBSD notes link broken. (1)

yeltski (1438587) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117770)

Nice release notes. I love FreeBSD myself, for its unified and thorough quality, but I work where CenOS/RHEL is the standard. I've managed to force the install of Ubuntu Server on the web server, because I need some of the latest packages. Can someone explain what the advantages of the Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is?

Re:kFreeBSD notes link broken. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118010)

ZFS

Debian website UI (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35117774)

I shat bricks when I realized that the Debian website UI was UPDATED! WOW! About time; They've had the same interface for 13 years...

Re:Debian website UI (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35117838)

Unfortunately the new interface doesn't look any better than the old one. Change for change's sake.

Re:Debian website UI (1)

ifiwereasculptor (1870574) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117914)

Damn! Now I'm flabbergasted too. Of course it's as ugly as the old one, since it's meant to be used even by text-only browsers, but it's still very cool.

Re:Debian website UI (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118726)

Being usable by text-only browsers has nothing whatsoever to do with design. Design and underlying function are completely separated since CSS works more or less flawlessly in all major browsers. And yes, even IE6 knows enough CSS to make usable sites look nice. Although *this* isn't worth the effort anymore ...

That said, the trend goes towards unusable websites again, alas.

Re:Debian website UI (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118820)

which part of clean and clear do you find ugly?

Works well, but significantly higher requirements (2, Informative)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117782)

Squeeze has significantly higher minimal install requirements than Lenny, to the point it wouldn't fit on my Dockstar or my Dt360. So if you are using Debian because it's small and light, don't upgrade.

Re:Works well, but significantly higher requiremen (3, Informative)

DieByWire (744043) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118280)

Squeeze has significantly higher minimal install requirements than Lenny, to the point it wouldn't fit on my Dockstar or my Dt360.

I'm running squeeze on a dockstar right now by booting from a USB stick. Some smart people made it easy for the rest of us. [doozan.com]

Re:Works well, but significantly higher requiremen (1)

MattBD (1157291) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118716)

I tried that on my pink PogoPlug but couldn't get it to work - install seemed to go fine but couldn't log in via SSH afterwards. Maybe that's why - could be Squeeze is too big for my PogoPlug. Might be worth trying it with Lenny instead.

Debian/BSD love nest found in Route 40 flophouse. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35117792)

Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is the way I'd go if I had to run "Linux". Thankfully, I get to use the whole FreeBSD enchilada. This release allso gives the Slashdot comics something to joke about after they've been flushed out of the Poconos.

Re:Debian/BSD love nest found in Route 40 flophous (2)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118002)

So if you had to run Linux, you wouldn't?

plot loosing it (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35117806)

thinks Debian is finally loosing the plot they been heading the wrong way for yonks

Yeah! (1)

xgadflyx (828530) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117818)

I have been using "sid" for forever and a day to make sure that I had all the new "features" in a timely fashion. With all that Squeeze ships with out of the box, I can now run stable and still be functional. Great job. Is this not one of the fastest Debian release cycles?

First release without a linux kernel?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35117856)

What about Debian GNU/Hurd?

Re:First release without a linux kernel?? (3, Informative)

guppysap13 (1225926) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117922)

GNU/Hurd has never been released in Stable. It is available in Unstable, but isn't complete enough for them to upgrade to Testing and Stable yet. GNU/kFreebsd however, is now an official Stable release with Squeeze (6.0).

KDE 4.6 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35117902)

now that debian 6.0 is released, will we have kde 4.6 in the official repositories?. those packages are not even in experimental.

Using Squeeze (1)

freddieb (537771) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117910)

I have been using Squeeze for a while now. It's a great package. I was just reading the debian/freebsd wiki. Interesting idea. I may try that in one of my kvm machines. Personally, I love Debian's long stable cycle. The current version is very up-to-date with the latest php (php-fpm via dotdeb), etc. I did compile a 2.6.37 vanilla kernel and that works just fine however, I am using the standard kernel as I could really see no difference on my server. Great job!!

Some CPU microarchitectures dropped from Debian... (5, Informative)

ornia (1225132) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117912)

It's interesting to note, that while Debian has traditionally supported more CPU microarchitectures than any other mainstream GNU+Linux distribution out there, they have decided to officially stop supporting multiple microarchitectures with the release of Squeeze. The dropped architectures are alpha, hppa, and arm, the latter of which is replaced by the new "Embedded" ABI of ARM, which Debian calls armel [debian.org] .

Although kfreebsd-i386 and kfreebsd-amd64 have been added, these are not true new CPU microarchitectures in and of themselves, as they are compiled to standard x86 and x86_64 respectively, but obviously with the fairly radical change of not using Linux at all with a different GNU libc requiring all packages to be recompiled. This is the same situation as we have traditionally seen in the never-officially-released hurd-i386 port of Debian (which makes sense to call Debian GNU I suppose, as the Hurd kernel is part of the GNU project already) which seems to be missing so far with Debian 6.0 so far, pending a decision to potentially drop it as well.

All in all, amazing work by all in the Debian project. It remains an incredibly impressive feat that such a project can have no corporate oversight or ownership yet maintain such an impressively influential, relevant, and useful place in the operating system ecosystem. Even with dropping a couple of architectures, Debian still supports more computer types than most people even know exists, and continues to provide package updates that many many other operating systems base their repositories from. Also wonderful to see the website be updated [debian.org] !!

Re:Some CPU microarchitectures dropped from Debian (1)

Nimey (114278) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117950)

In Debian's defense, there haven't been any Alphas built for many years, and I'd expect the same to be true of HPPA, which IIRC was replaced by Itanium.

Re:Some CPU microarchitectures dropped from Debian (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118142)

If you're going to drop Alpha, why not drop m68k?

What are we supposed to do with our old Alphas? Just set them on fire? Not that I have one any more.

Re:Some CPU microarchitectures dropped from Debian (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118250)

If you're going to drop Alpha, why not drop m68k?

What are we supposed to do with our old Alphas? Just set them on fire? Not that I have one any more.

It's volunteer work, so I guess it's a matter of having enough people interested in the platform
and willing to do the work.

Re:Some CPU microarchitectures dropped from Debian (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118266)

m68k was dropped from Debian stable and remains only available through old stable releases and debian unstable. Ditt fate for Alpha and HPPA.

Re:Some CPU microarchitectures dropped from Debian (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118452)

m86k was already dropped with the release of lenny, so two years ago.

Re:Some CPU microarchitectures dropped from Debian (3, Informative)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118728)

I'm guessing that there are more developers interested in maintaining the m68k port than the Alpha port. Or at least that's how that typically goes. Unless you've got a strange OS like NetBSD which is obsessed with running on absolutely every possible architecture from mainframes to wrist watches, some platforms tend to not have enough people with the hardware and interest to keep updating the branch.

Re:Some CPU microarchitectures dropped from Debian (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118980)

The proper way of running Alphas is with OpenVMS. :)

Re:Some CPU microarchitectures dropped from Debian (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35119042)

m68k was dropped a long time ago. While it is true that official support has been dropped, they still exist in Debian sid (they haven't even been moved to debian-ports.org) and may come back if their situation improves.
Last but not least, there are other ports in preparation and some may become part of Wheezy:
http://www.debian-ports.org/ [debian-ports.org]
(at least there's an intent to move from armel to armhf)

Re:Some CPU microarchitectures dropped from Debian (1)

snookiex (1814614) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118060)

This "Armel" flavor is used, among other things, as a base for Maemo [maemo.org] (and I guess for MeeGo [meego.com] too).

I'm still waiting for my 6.0 (0)

DarkAnt (760333) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117920)

Go Go CentOS Team!
I guess cheering isn't quite as effective as contributing.

Snore (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35117976)

Staid, boring Debian updated!

Sun rises in West!

Politicians now honest!

Are they mad? (2)

Moldiver (1343577) | more than 3 years ago | (#35117994)

Are they mad at Debian? The thing that annoys most on Linux are the gnu-parts in the userland. Why should someone with a nice and well-designed bsd-userland use the gnu-tools instead?

Or is this some kind of âoewe can do itâ?

Re:Are they mad? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118102)

Don't use it then. You're not forced to and you have a choice. Personally, I can't stand BSD's userland tools and prefer GNU's.

Why? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118900)

Why do you prefer the GNU tools? I'm genuinely curious, as I find that the BSD userland is much more pleasant to use and on the whole more complete too. Let alone better documented.

Still, you might have a point, so please elaborate.

Re:Are they mad? (2)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118766)

To be honest, that puzzles me as well. The big advantage that pretty much everybody else has over Linux is that they consider the kernel and userland to be tied together with only minor patching to the OS between releases. It makes it a lot easier to do performance tweaking and bug fixing if you have control over the entire base install. It also means that if you send into the mailing list with a problem you can concisely tell them what OS version you're running and they'll have a reasonable understanding of what your software environment is like. If you get a kernel panic you're still likely to have to have to look at the core that you get to figure out what exactly happened, but that's mostly because drivers vary from machine to machine.

Debian6.0 squeeze screenshots Tour (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118012)

Find screenshots tour for Debian6.0 in this link [unixmen.com]

Re:Debian6.0 squeeze screenshots Tour (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118654)

Very exciting.

yay. two more variants that nobody will want. (0, Flamebait)

IGnatius T Foobar (4328) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118112)

It's always amusing to see Debian fans complaining that the end users are always going for Ubuntu instead of "hey, why not choose Debian, it's the original and it's the best!" when Debian keeps making moves like this. It's already bad enough to think that a new Linux user would want a browser called "IceWeasel" or would understand that it's really just Firefox renamed because of some silly branding/icon tiff with the mozilla folks. Now they'll have the additional enjoyment of having a bunch of useful drivers removed, or even enjoying the wonderfulness of a nonstandard kernel!

Listen, it's ok to do stuff like this if you're really into teh sooper 100% free as in freedom rms-approved purity, but don't subsequently go complaining when ordinary end users don't want it because it's unusable to anyone other than a free software hacker.

Re:yay. two more variants that nobody will want. (1, Offtopic)

tyrione (134248) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118198)

It's always amusing to see Debian fans complaining that the end users are always going for Ubuntu instead of "hey, why not choose Debian, it's the original and it's the best!" when Debian keeps making moves like this. It's already bad enough to think that a new Linux user would want a browser called "IceWeasel" or would understand that it's really just Firefox renamed because of some silly branding/icon tiff with the mozilla folks. Now they'll have the additional enjoyment of having a bunch of useful drivers removed, or even enjoying the wonderfulness of a nonstandard kernel! Listen, it's ok to do stuff like this if you're really into teh sooper 100% free as in freedom rms-approved purity, but don't subsequently go complaining when ordinary end users don't want it because it's unusable to anyone other than a free software hacker.

FreeBSD is building its tree using LLVM/Clang as well as GCC. I look forward to seeing Debian FreeBSD and all those packages giving the option of both LLVM and GCC. There will be plenty of people using them and I assume one LLVM 3.0 is out that Ubuntu will seriously be peaking in on what's going on with it.

Re:yay. two more variants that nobody will want. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118204)

but don't subsequently go complaining when ordinary end users don't want it because it's unusable to anyone other than a free software hacker.

I think this is a big exaggeration, Debian is not unusable unless you are a free software hacker. I'm not one (I actually dislike GNU/zealots) and I find it very usable.

Re:yay. two more variants that nobody will want. (4, Insightful)

johnw (3725) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118236)

Can you provide an actual example of Debian fans complaining in the way you indicate, or is it all in your imagination?

Debian tends to be the way it is because Debian users (and builders) like it that way. Of course they do end up being rather smug as well, but complaints about those who choose to use lesser distributions are notably absent.

Re:yay. two more variants that nobody will want. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118252)

So Debian should degrade the entire OS for the care about newcomers? No thank you. Ubuntu does that pretty well already. Isn't that enough?

Re:yay. two more variants that nobody will want. (5, Interesting)

ffreeloader (1105115) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118282)

What a load of bs.

I started with Debian as total Linux noob back when Woody was the official release. I've stayed because Debian stable is so stable, and because the APT system is about as good as installers get. I've never had to wonder whether something wasn't working because it was buggy, or because I lacked the requisite knowledge to configure it correctly. That alone made learning Linux much, much easier and far more straightforward. I'd used a couple of other distros before I heard of Debian, but even simple things in the gui didn't work on them because of bugs and I got very frustrated with them. I never knew if any problem I ran across was a bug or because I'd done something stupid. With Debian I could know with a high degree of certainty that the problems I encountered were my own stupidity, not someone elses.

Debian was a breath of fresh air compared to all the bugs in other distros and Windows. I've played with Ubuntu a few times, but always abandoned it because it's not gotten any better over the years. It's always buggy, buggy, buggy. If I wanted a buggy OS I would have stayed with Windows. And, I find fewer bugs and newer software in the vast majority of cases in Debian testing and unstable than I do in Ubuntu.

Re:yay. two more variants that nobody will want. (1, Troll)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118314)

It's already bad enough to think that a new Linux user would want a browser called "IceWeasel" or would understand that it's really just Firefox renamed

It's already bad enough to think that a new Linux user would want a browser called Firefox.

Re:yay. two more variants that nobody will want. (1)

wisty (1335733) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118384)

Debian fans don't really care. They want a nice, predictable, stable server. This goal is antagonistic to having an exciting new dev box, which is what Ubuntu is for.

Re:yay. two more variants that nobody will want. (5, Informative)

rl117 (110595) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118448)

You should be aware that Debian is not allowed to use the trademark "Firefox" and also have the ability to apply patches such as security fixes(1). It's not called "Iceweasel" out of anything but necessity. You think this is a Debian-specific issue? Well, no, it's actually a major problem for all other distributors as well(2).

1 [lwn.net]
2 [fedoraproject.org]

So the links are 5 years old, but the issues surrounding the trademarks haven't changed or gone away. Distributions shipping "Firefox" have abrogated their ability (and responsibility) to be able to apply changes and security updates to the software without the explicit concent of Mozilla Corporation.

Not exactly free software when it comes on those terms, is it?

Regarding the kernel, I assume you're referring to the non-free firmware removal. Maybe you haven't been fully informed that the non-free firmware was actually removed from the upstream kernel sources as well. As a result, the Debian kernels are far from "non-standard", they are standard!

Regards,
Roger

[FFS Slashdot, it's 2011 and you still can't handle UTF-8!]

Re:Firefox Updates (2)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 3 years ago | (#35119018)

Wait, is this the reason that when I tried to upgrade Firefox "like normal" on ubuntu I couldn't do it without major new package component upgrades? I'm the arctypical nervous newbie, and I went to go get an update, and got back messages that it wouldn't update without other new pieces.

Re:yay. two more variants that nobody will want. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118754)

It's always amusing to see Debian fans complaining that the end users are always going for Ubuntu instead of "hey, why not choose Debian, it's the original and it's the best!" when Debian keeps making moves like this.

What moves? This is a release announcement. Do you mean that Debian should stop releasing stable versions?

It's already bad enough to think that a new Linux user would want a browser called "IceWeasel" or would understand that it's really just Firefox renamed because of some silly branding/icon tiff with the mozilla folks.

So go complain to Mozilla.

having a bunch of useful drivers removed

There are no drivers purposefully removed, FAFAIK. Are you referring to firmware, perhaps?

a nonstandard kernel!

Nonstandard? Are you referring to the kfreebsd kernel? It is very much standard as released by FreeBSD [freebsd.org] . Or do you mean the firmware-split in the Linux kernel? That feature has been upstream for years [lwn.net] . Or maybe you mean that it's a non-NTOS kernel? I guess you're right on that one, but most Free people would consider that a plus.

Listen, it's ok to do stuff like this if you're really into teh sooper 100% free as in freedom rms-approved purity, but don't subsequently go complaining when ordinary end users don't want it because it's unusable to anyone other than a free software hacker.

Listen, it's ok to use any Linux you like, but don't subsequently go complaining when ordinary distributors release a Free operating system that you woudn't use.

Oh, and regarding Ubuntu: please get back to me when Ubuntu releases a supported server variant that runs on my NAS [cyrius.com] .

Awesome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118228)

Great timing. I used Debian for many years, and have been using Ubuntu lately. With all stupid Ubuntu decisions lately, like commercialising the downloads and replacing gnome's GUI with their own crap, I'm about ready to go back to Debian.

modernisation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35118498)

I am delighted the Debian project has moved to more modern communication media such as blogs and identica, it was about time!. Although I found a bit spamming all the information in the identica feed and I would have rather having this in a post in the Blog.

Most RC-free release in a long time (4, Interesting)

gringer (252588) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118644)

I'm amazed that they stuck this release freeze out long enough to get the RC bugs for the testing release down to what looks like the lowest since the graph [debian.org] began tracking testing in 2004 -- I would like to believe that this means squeeze will end up being the most stable/reliable release so far.

Now that the release is done and the freeze is over, an upgrade of the Linux kernel (from 2.6.32 to 2.6.37) in unstable should be soon to follow. Also, Firefox (probably 3.5.9 -> 4) and LibreOffice (OOO 3.2.1 -> LO 3.3).

Kernel in userspace? (0)

Frankie70 (803801) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118732)

'Debian GNU/kFreeBSD will port both a 32- and 64-bit PC version of the FreeBSD kernel into the Debian userspace

I don't get this? How can a kernel be in the userspace?

Lenny (1)

Frankie70 (803801) | more than 3 years ago | (#35118812)

Just finished an upgrade from etch to lenny a few weeks back!

Squeeze (1)

jazzmans (622827) | more than 3 years ago | (#35119016)

Oh, Yeah.

finally updated my server from lenny to squeeze. Nice work Debian! I run sid on my workstations/netbooks/laptops, but stable is my server and 'friends' computer installs.

The new website is nice. Clean, simple.

XFCE for the win.

jaz

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...