Beta
×

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 Turns 20

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the and-many-more dept.

Debian 121

New submitter stderr_dk writes "According to Wikipedia, the initial release of Debian happened 16 August 1993. In other words, it's Debian's birthday and you're all invited. 'During the Debian Birthday, the Debian conference will open its doors to anyone interested in finding out more about Debian and Free Software, inviting enthusiasts, users, and developers to a half day of talks relating to Free Software, the Debian Project, and the Debian operating system.' Over the years, Debian has been forked a number of times. Some of the more well-known forks are Ubuntu and Knoppix. The latest release of Debian pure blend was Debian 7.1 'Wheezy' on June 15th 2013."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

THANKS!!! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44585475)

Thanks to Debian devs, community, and everyone else involved.

Re:THANKS!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44586281)

Yes, thank you to everyone involved!
-- Little user.

Re:THANKS!!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44586695)

Thanks Obama!

Re:THANKS!!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44586747)

Thanks NSA!

Re:THANKS!!! (1)

Zaiff Urgulbunger (591514) | about a year ago | (#44587179)

Hear, hear!

Re:THANKS!!! (5, Insightful)

unixisc (2429386) | about a year ago | (#44587837)

Two things I'd like to really appreciate Debian doing:
  1. 1.)Supporting as many hardware platforms as they could, and not yanking support simply b'cos it's going nowhere. I'm looking at you, Itanic!
  2. 2.)Being platform agnostic as well - coming out with distros of FBSD and HURD

I really hope that Debian's non-Linux platforms fully develop and mature. Also, I'd toast Debian for being prudent and offering unliberated software separately, in defiance of the FSF jihadis. While on that topic, Debian also should be commended for joining OSI and embracing Open Source as well as their own FSG.

Re:THANKS!!! (5, Interesting)

lvxferre (2470098) | about a year ago | (#44590293)

Also, I'd toast Debian for being prudent and offering unliberated software separately, in defiance of the FSF jihadis.

Agreed. Debian plays as "the last sane man" [okay, distro] regarding that: they realize that open source is freer than closed source, but closed source is still freer than no program; installing by default only free but allowing the users [if they wish to do so] install non-free is the least restrictive thing they could do.

Happy birthday, Debian!

Re:THANKS!!! (1)

JayRott (1524587) | about a year ago | (#44591677)

Oh, to have mod points! Honorary +1

Happy Birthday Debian! (5, Informative)

monzie (729782) | about a year ago | (#44585505)

.. and to all the contributors - Thank you for creating this awesome distribution!

My Usual Pick (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | about a year ago | (#44585523)

I started out with Slackware, but package management proved a bit of a headache. Redhat was next, but I confess I never gave it much of a chance. I went to Ubuntu, but had some real problems, particularly with some Apache 2. At that point I said "f--- it" and went to Debian, around version 5. I tried out Centos, figuring I should give the Redhat ecosystem a try again, and while it's a pretty good, somehow I like Debian the best, and returned to Wheezy for my new KVM servers.

Re:My Usual Pick (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44586223)

The Slackware fanfaggots would tell you it's your fault for not being smart enough to manage packages yourself.

Re:My Usual Pick (1)

Pop69 (700500) | about a year ago | (#44587653)

They'd be correct !

Simply The Best! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44585561)

I can't think of a better distro for downloading the latest Microsoft ISOs from my MSDN subscription! Cheers, guys!

Re:Simply The Best! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44587927)

Is that you Hairyfeet? Oh wait HF can't program, not even a little. My bad.

Is it really? (3, Informative)

geek (5680) | about a year ago | (#44585577)

I'm not so sure. The Debian group "formed" for lack of a better work on 8/16/93 but they didnt release anything til almost 1995. So the group might be 20 years old but the distro itself maybe not.

Re:Is it really? (4, Funny)

some old guy (674482) | about a year ago | (#44585665)

Dude, it's a party...lose the buzzkill. :)

Re:Is it really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44585717)

Maybe it's 2013-08-17 already where the OP lives and the party is over :)

Re:Is it really? (3, Interesting)

KiloByte (825081) | about a year ago | (#44586069)

Hmm... sounds like a good reason to party twice, then. And I'm at the DebConf at the moment...

Re:Is it really? (4, Informative)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#44586123)

wrong, 0.01 was released August 1993 and was usable

in fact, if you are referring to the 1.0 release in 1995 that had the bad CD with wrong stuff on it

Re:Is it really? (4, Informative)

jones_supa (887896) | about a year ago | (#44586213)

Correct. Here's the full background story of the CD incident for anyone who's interested:

Debian 1.0 was never released: InfoMagic, a CD vendor, accidentally shipped a development release of Debian and entitled it 1.0. On December 11th 1995, Debian and InfoMagic jointly announced that this release was screwed. Bruce Perens explains that the data placed on the "InfoMagic Linux Developer's Resource 5-CD Set November 1995" as "Debian 1.0" is not the Debian 1.0 release, but an early development version which is only partially in the ELF format, will probably not boot or run correctly, and does not represent the quality of a released Debian system. To prevent confusion between the premature CD version and the actual Debian release, the Debian Project has renamed its next release to "Debian 1.1". The premature Debian 1.0 on CD is deprecated and should not be used. [1] [debian.org]

Re:Is it really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44587081)

I thought 1.0 versions of anything were never released, firstly because they usually suck and secondly because it looks better form a marketing perspective to start around 3 or 4.

Re:Is it really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44587641)

The traditional release number for version 1.0 is 3.11.

Re:Is it really? (2)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#44588673)

funny, at work the clamav has caught java jar vulnerabilities and malware our superior proprietary tools missed, and it isn't yet at 1.0

Re:Is it really? (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#44588699)

(note: use of "superior" above is totally sarcastic)

Re:Is it really? (1)

swillden (191260) | about a year ago | (#44590649)

I thought 1.0 versions of anything were never released, firstly because they usually suck and secondly because it looks better form a marketing perspective to start around 3 or 4.

In the open source world, historically the problem has been the opposite. Many packages have version 0.1, 0.5, 0.6, 0.8, 0.9, 0.91, 0.92... and so on. There's a reluctance to apply the "1.0" label because that means you have something that's really "done" in some sense.

Re:Is it really? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44586873)

Until they got their own distro working they had to use another one. They chose Gentoo, so it took a year to compile.

Re:Is it really? (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about a year ago | (#44588221)

The Debian group "formed" for lack of a better work on 8/16/93 but they didnt release anything til almost 1995.

Whereas you started acing the grade school homewerks the day you were born.

Re:Is it really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44590055)

I see you still haven't learned what "Debian Stable" means

It was 20 years ago today... (1, Funny)

TeknoHog (164938) | about a year ago | (#44585657)

Aww, fsck it, not this meme again... [iki.fi]

One of the best (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44585681)

Debian is probably the most consistent among all Linux distributions. I love the community spirit and non-commercial nature of Debian. Rock solid and stable and of course truly free "as in freedom".

And with the goal of being the "universal operating system" which recently come true with becoming the official OS on the International Space Station, I look forward to the next 20 years of Debian awesomeness and galactic domination!

Re:One of the best (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44585771)

Yeah, consistently out of date.

Re: One of the best (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44585811)

Not necessarily. You can always use Debian "Testing" or even the "Unstable" repositories for the latest-and-greatest software, and it's very stable too despite the name.

However, I do hope that Debian stable gets a faster release cycle someday. A yearly release would rock! Until then, Testing and Unstable are your friends for a great Linux desktop.

Re: One of the best (5, Informative)

beefoot (2250164) | about a year ago | (#44586301)

It is called stable for a reason. For server environment, stable works really well. Hell no way I would want to upgrade my server every year. Every 3 years --- maybe. Ideally would be every 5 years. As you pointed out, if you want newer stuffs, go with testing or unstable. They are called testing / unstable for a reason. Ubuntu's release schedule drives me nuts.

Re: One of the best (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44590207)

Unfortunately Ubuntu appears to have been pushing Debian towards faster releases. The frequency of release has increased and the number of bugs in stable has increased.

Re: One of the best (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44590295)

You say you prefer releases every five years, but that is exactly the life span of ubuntu LTS releases. If you want a five year life cycle and Debian packages/admin style then Ubuntu is actually your best option.

Re: One of the best (1)

Raenex (947668) | about a year ago | (#44591589)

Hell no way I would want to upgrade my server every year. Every 3 years --- maybe. Ideally would be every 5 years.

This attitude is why tech companies ossify.

Re: One of the best (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44586433)

Not to mention backports [debian.org] , which allow you to install on stable newer versions of packages from testing which have been specially prepared and tested for stable (ie which handle any differences in behaviour between stable and testing).

Re:One of the best (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44586077)

Consistently shite, more like it. Or consistently idiots.

Re:One of the best (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#44586139)

stability and massive amounts of testing are valued on production servers. if you're running latest bleeding edge releases of either kernel or langauge or major server packages you *will* have problems

Re:One of the best (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44587421)

Bullshit! I constantly stay updated on the Linux kernel, GCC, QT, Ruby, Java and have NEVER had any problems. Even on backward compatibility breaking versions, like going from Ruby 1.8->1.9 I had no real problems on 20000+ LOC projects, took about 20 minutes to get it up and running and test flawlessly.

Re:One of the best (2)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#44588637)

said the anonymous coward. Meanwhile, I really do admin over 400 production servers of various distros (and a little Unix and windows too), some run by groups with Ubuntu server and I have indeed seen the folly of using that bleeding edge distro

Re:One of the best (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44590263)

You do realize you are anonymous also don't you?

Ubuntu server? No shit you had problems. Don't be a fucking retard. That is even more pants on head retarded than use Debian as a server

I recently moved a SaaS company from Java 5 to Java 7 with zero issues. And this is a 100000+ LOC project.

I have a fairly small Rails project I have been working on in my spare time. It started out at Rails 2.3(and Ruby 1.8) and is now at 4.0(with Ruby 2.0). Again, it required no real extra work, other than cp vendor lib and a little extra config. Took about 30 minutes, if that.

Even on my server, I update shit every week and have zero downtime.

Just because you are incompetent doesn't mean everyone else is

Re:One of the best (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44588353)

...but if you're running "stable" versions you're stuck with old bugs.

"Up to date" doesn't mean "run from git" you know? It just means the latest released version, which Debian rarely has.

Re:One of the best (4, Funny)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about a year ago | (#44587425)

Yeah, consistently out of date.

Because God knows, you don't want to miss Ubuntu's next exciting innovation.

Re:One of the best (1)

UltraZelda64 (2309504) | about a year ago | (#44589055)

Which one, Mir? Or its new package management system?

Re:One of the best (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44588115)

Consistantly shitty.

A true Debian fan here (2)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44585693)

I use a lot of Debian's work for everyday use from Linux Mint on my laptop, to Debian on an x86 server, to Raspbian on a RPI. It's really nice stuff, simple, classic, yet amazingly powerful. Congrats Debian!

-- stoops

Have they fixed their "Firefox" problem yet? (0, Flamebait)

sqrt(2) (786011) | about a year ago | (#44585721)

Can I install Firfox with a simple apt-get command immediately after install? Or am I still stuck with the idiotic IceWeasel fork or a tedious install process involving adding new repos and keys for a totally different distro?

Would it be so hard to at least include it in their repo for people who want it even if it's not installed by default?

Re:Have they fixed their "Firefox" problem yet? (2, Insightful)

geek (5680) | about a year ago | (#44585769)

For Debian, ideology trumps usability. It's why Ubuntu exists.

Re:Have they fixed their "Firefox" problem yet? (4, Insightful)

sqrt(2) (786011) | about a year ago | (#44585909)

It's too bad Ubuntu went full retard back when they released Unity, and then just threw the oars out of the boat entirely with the Amazon spyware fiasco. Thankfully there's still sane derivative distros like Xubuntu and Mint that can leverage the useful work Canonical is doing.

Re:Have they fixed their "Firefox" problem yet? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44586389)

Then they shot a hole in the bottom of the boat by choosing to fork Wayland for their own incompatible graphics stack.

Re:Have they fixed their "Firefox" problem yet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44586137)

Fuck Ubuntu. Mint is where it's at.

Re:Have they fixed their "Firefox" problem yet? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44588475)

Fuck debian and all its bastard children. They all suck ass.

Re:Have they fixed their "Firefox" problem yet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44589093)

Do you say that with personal experience and evidence of saliva on your ass?

Re:Have they fixed their "Firefox" problem yet? (5, Insightful)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#44585935)

maybe complain to firefox about their branding/copyright/licensing?

Re:Have they fixed their "Firefox" problem yet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44587017)

Debian wanted to change Firefox defaults*, and then Debian users would complain to the Firefox developers. The current situation is probably for the best.

* for example to show labels for ALT attributes, like IE

Re:Have they fixed their "Firefox" problem yet? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44585987)

Iceweasel is Firefox... the difference is the branding because Mozilla insisted they not use the non-freely licensed images or name.

Re:Have they fixed their "Firefox" problem yet? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44587475)

Then why does any other sane distro ship Firefox branding and all?

Debian wanted to make changes and recompile which would cause all sorts of issues for Mozilla.

That makes it decidedly NOT Firefox.

Iceweasel is dogshit, just like everything else that comes from Debian. I would rather use Konquerer or even w3m over Iceshit.

Re:Have they fixed their "Firefox" problem yet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44588683)

Mozilla wouldn't even let us apply security patches without prior consent from them. In addition the logo license is incompatible with the Debian Free Software Guidelines. Ubuntu on the other hand apparently doesn't care that much about that.

Re:Have they fixed their "Firefox" problem yet? (1)

vilanye (1906708) | about a year ago | (#44590285)

Mozilla wouldn't even let us apply security patches without prior consent from them. In addition the logo license is incompatible with the Debian Free Software Guidelines. Ubuntu on the other hand apparently doesn't care that much about that.

So you are not using Firefox for religious reasons?

Grats?

Treating product logos the same as open source code is foolish if you at all care about its value.

Re:Have they fixed their "Firefox" problem yet? (4, Insightful)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#44586029)

just download the latest tarball from mozilla and unpack it into a directory like /local or /opt, then run firefox/firefox on that path what's the big deal?

http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/ [mozilla.org]

Re:Have they fixed their "Firefox" problem yet? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | about a year ago | (#44588869)

its not Debian's problem, its the Mozilla foundation's problem.

And iceweasel is the same code, with another ( silly ) logo.

Why so serious? (2)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#44585813)

It's a time to celebrate, not to have what sounds like a fairly businessy and serious event. This is like celebrating the Fourth of July by bombing Britain.

Re:Why so serious? (2)

Eunuchswear (210685) | about a year ago | (#44586017)

It's a time to celebrate, not to have what sounds like a fairly businessy and serious event. This is like celebrating the Fourth of July by bombing Britain.

Soundls like a plan to me.

Go for it!

Re:Why so serious? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44586205)

Amerikkka, fuck yeah!

USA!!! USA!! #1

Dont like it, go fuck yourself, fucking commie.

Re:Why so serious? (3, Funny)

Hognoxious (631665) | about a year ago | (#44587301)

Go ahead, lardy-boy. Given your awesome talent for geography [time.com] you'd probably hit Bahrain, Bhutan or Belgium anyway.

Hang on, I'm in Be . .. .£$@* &
no carrier

Re:Why so serious? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44589809)

Or Boston.

most memorable and significant fork (3, Informative)

CAIMLAS (41445) | about a year ago | (#44585901)

One of the most memorable forks of Debian was Stormix (not mentioned on WP): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stormix

For those who don't remember, or weren't there: it was a very nicely cleaned up Debian installer with additional driver support and simplified configuration. It ran very well on a wide range of systems and was way, way ahead of pretty much everything else with respect to software installation and system configuration.

The Stormix company, when it failed, became Progeny, if I recall correctly. Progeny was a greatly used add-on repository for Debian which eventually had a lot of the functionality added into the core of Debian.

Without Stormix, later efforts like Knoppix and Ubuntu would not have been possible.

Re:most memorable and significant fork (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44587011)

I didn't like Stomy when I tried it, too much borkage compared to a main distro and then it disappeared or went dead. But you mentioning Knoppix... Didn't they get the whole running a distro from a CD only into the big time?

Re:most memorable and significant fork (1)

swillden (191260) | about a year ago | (#44590687)

But you mentioning Knoppix... Didn't they get the whole running a distro from a CD only into the big time?

Yep, LiveCD operation was Knoppix' raison d'etre. It was an awesome system repair tool back in the day. System borked? Boot from your trusty Knoppix CD (later, USB stick), mount the drive and fix it. A few years later I switched to Damn Small Linux for that purpose instead, but still kept a Knoppix CD around.

Re:most memorable and significant fork (2)

Rinikusu (28164) | about a year ago | (#44588387)

Stormix was one of the few boxed Linux sets I bothered to purchase, simply to help support the company and its efforts. I never used it (redhat & beos user at the time), but I liked where it was headed and definitely appreciated Knoppix when it came out. For similar reasons I picked up OpenBSD and FreeBSD CDs from walnut creek? because it's good to have options and it was an easy way for me to help "support" stuff like this.

Linux Mint is my distro of choice at the moment. Long live debian!

(and one day, I will have a slack machine)

Re:most memorable and significant fork (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44589523)

The Stormix company, when it failed, became Progeny, if I recall correctly. Progeny was a greatly used add-on repository for Debian which eventually had a lot of the functionality added into the core of Debian.

Without Stormix, later efforts like Knoppix and Ubuntu would not have been possible.

Former Progeny employee here.

Stormix and Progeny had no relationship. Progeny Debian was a full-fledged distro in its own right, not an add-on set to Debian, although we did contribute everything back. Progeny Debian was sort of a "pre-Ubuntu Ubuntu" in that we had a lot of the same goals as Ubuntu.

I see Ian is still there (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44585931)

Whatever happened to Deb?

Re:I see Ian is still there (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44586485)

Ian used ReiserFS. That's what happened.

Re:I see Ian is still there (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44586569)

Deb's dead, baby. Deb's dead.

(and Netcraft confirms it)

And in celebration... (5, Funny)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about a year ago | (#44586135)

...Debian will be available FREE all day today!

Yehaaa!!! (1)

madcat_sun (2812213) | about a year ago | (#44586191)

Well done Deb!!!!

Congrats Debian :) (1)

codelectron (2675091) | about a year ago | (#44586353)

I started using debian since 2000 its something that changed they way i use an OS. Consistency, cool .deb package manager. sticking with single UI. parenting so many distros. platform based repos portings. lot more . really great effort.

Thanks, from an embedded designer. (2)

gmarsh (839707) | about a year ago | (#44586545)

I've used Debian extensively in the past for embedded Linux development - I've got equipment in the field running on the x86, armel, mips and powerpc ports, from biscuit PCs running full GUIs to $10 uP's doing network-attached-widget duties in the corner of a PCB.

Debian's "non-x86" ports work well, the distribution is simple, trims down small, easily modified for whatever purpose, and it just plain gets the job done. Couldn't be happier with it.

Re:Thanks, from an embedded designer. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44587747)

If you have an OS on an embedded device you have done embedded yet.

Re:Thanks, from an embedded designer. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44588639)

What? Embedded devices don't run on magic. I'm not convinced you understand the concepts, here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embedded_software

Re:Thanks, from an embedded designer. (1)

vilanye (1906708) | about a year ago | (#44590317)

Not the OP but felt like responding.

There are cases where the embedded device can't run an OS, even a stripped down one.

I don't work in the embedded space but a friend does and he often doesn't have the luxury of being able to put an OS on it, and has to handle all of the low-level details. Some of the devices he programs for only has 4-16MB of RAM for everything.

Re:Thanks, from an embedded designer. (1)

swillden (191260) | about a year ago | (#44590761)

Some of the devices he programs for only has 4-16MB of RAM for everything.

LOL.

My major embedded experience was on some control boards with 4 MiB RAM and 4 MiB Flash ROM. That was pretty beefy, though, and had a full-featured, pre-emptive multi-tasking OS (VxWorks). The really interesting work was on the five V25 microcontrollers which we used to run the many serial ports (actually, there were UARTs to actually run the serial ports, but the V25s were responsible for the care and feeding of the UARTs). Each V25 had 16 KiB of RAM, no ROM. There was no OS at all on them; it was bare metal programming.

Re:Thanks, from an embedded designer. (1)

gmarsh (839707) | about a year ago | (#44589697)

In one case I selected an ARM chip, drew the schematic, made a set of rules for the PCB guy so the DRAM/flash interface would have good signal integrity, verified the layout and had it sent off for manufacture. Then brought the prototype board up, broke out the J-Link, verified the hardware, banged out and debugged an assembly code bootloader to initialize the ARM and pull the customized kernel out of NAND. Once I had Debian running stable on there, I handed it off to the software guys for them to do their part.

But sigh, it runs an OS, so I guess I'm not an embedded designer. Got a better job title?

Re:Thanks, from an embedded designer. (1)

vilanye (1906708) | about a year ago | (#44590299)

Assembly line worker?

I am not sure what the OP was getting at but that works. :)

Libranet was one of the best forks ever (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44586915)

I wish to remember Libranet, of which I bougth versions 2.7 and 2.8.1. It was a fork like no other. Lightweight, carefully crafted, with a kernel compilation utility, beautiful and useful website. Why can't this be replicated nowadays, I don't understand. Those were the days.

Better late than ... er oops (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44587185)

Well, seeing as this story was posted after all the talks at DebConf today, it's a bit late.

Celebration (2)

jtotheh (229796) | about a year ago | (#44587243)

To celebrate, I enabled jessie(testing) in my sources.list, used aptitude to install a 3.10 kernel with RT (I was running 3.9) and rebooted - everything seems to be working great.This is on a Macbook Pro running wheezy(stable) with reFind boot manager. Thanks Debian!

Happy Birthday... in related news (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44587319)

In related news, 20 Debian related IRC chat channels were the sites of furious arguments about how to celebrate Debian's birthday. On one channel a group of 20 developers decided to stick a fork in the cake and threatened to celebrate 'independently' of the main group because they were unhappy with the format of the celebratory proceedings. Similar events happened on other channels, and within each group. In the end, they decided to postpone development of any 'party' till all other issues were resolved, and a celebration (some argue it should be called a party) is pending, some time in the next 5 years.

So what are they up to? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44587325)

2.4 or have they gone up to the modern 2.6 yet? is GCC 2.0 allowed yet? I haven't seen any greater stability with Debian compared to up to date modern distros. Not even a little difference. Old!=stable

Re:So what are they up to? (2)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about a year ago | (#44587791)

Ho ho ho. A riot, you are. Debian stable (7.1, "wheezy") uses the 3.2 kernel (and incorporates patches from as far upstream as 3.4.47) and GCC 4.7.2. Debian testing ("jessie") (which you shouldn't hesitate to use if you need the newer versions of stuff) has the 3.10 kernel, and GCC 4.8.1.

Re:So what are they up to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44587961)

True, the stable kernel is dated. But a quick trip to wheezy-backports shows 3.9, with 3.10 on the way.

Re:So what are they up to? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44589177)

Wow, that is up to date.

Fucking Debian needs to die.

20 years as a shit eating zombie is long enough. Put the fucker out of his misery already.

Libranet as one of the most memorable forks (1)

simplas (3021965) | about a year ago | (#44587627)

Just wanted to mention Libranet: a very well crafted fork that I bought twice (2.7 and 2.8.1). Why not revive it? It was the best easy-to-use Debian ever.

THANK YOU! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44587691)

Thank you developers, maintainers, and everybody else involved in this great distribution!
Been using Debian since early 2004 - when Sarge was testing (and it was testing for quite a while!) and didn't ever feel the need to switch to any other distribution for personal use.
In professional use some others (RHEL-based, SLES) are the base of infrastructure but Debian holds its own there as well.

Here's to 20+ more years of Debian!

Debian has been forked. (1)

whizbang77045 (1342005) | about a year ago | (#44587907)

I can well believe Debian has been forked. No, wait, it's another word I had in mind.

The real party is next year. (1)

matthew_t_west (800388) | about a year ago | (#44588707)

Everyone knows the 21st birthday is real year to party!

  "Shlappy Burfday Debbie Anne!"

Deb and Ian (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44588947)

Still together?

Thank you! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44588979)

Thank you, Deb!

Thank you, Ian!

Thank you all the others, who have been part of making this great distro!

Btrot69 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44591611)

Happy birthday to my favorite distro !
I love your purity (even though it can be a PITA sometimes).
I love your dependability (uptime usually shows in months).
I love your security (least likely to have an NSA backdoor ?).
I love your portability and support for old hardware (I currently have it running on a PPC Mac mini and a Raspberry Pi).
OK, OK, I use Ubuntu too -- but that hasn't been nearly as happy ;(

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?