×

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!

Libranet 2.8 Review

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the give-in-to-the-power-of-debian dept.

Debian 195

TheMadPenguin writes "When I heard about Libranet 2.8 containing KDE 3.1 and kernel 2.4.20 in our forums, I just about fell out of the chair I was sitting in. As you all probably already know, Libranet is a Debian-based distro aimed toward the desktop user. Until now, I had never heard of a Debian release with all the newest goodies, but my world was about to get turned upside down. Read the full review with screenshots at MadPenguin.org."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

195 comments

Vegan? (-1, Offtopic)

Michael's a Jerk! (668185) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925142)

My PhD dissertation was on the very subject of veganism. Through my
studies of the health and lifestyles of vegetarians, vegans, and
normal healthy eaters, it became clear to me that eliding meat from
one's diet is a surefire way of shortening one's lifespan and causing
irreversible developmental retardations in children. We humans are
designed to eat meat, and the consequences of not doing so are
numerous:

* It is impossible for a strict vegetarian diet to provide all the
essential amino acids necessary to develop and maintain a human body.
A vegetarian can eat all the beans and nuts he likes, but he still
won't get his daily requirements of lysine or glycine. The
consequences can range from muscle atrophy to development of diabetes
and other severe disorders. Vegans further exacerbate this problem by
avoiding nutritious milk, eggs, and other animal products.

* Vitamin B-12 does not exist in vegetable matter, and can only be
absorbed from animal products. This vitamin keeps your brain and
nervous system in working order, and is absolutely essential to
infants' growth cycles. Unfortunately vegans are so tied up in their
dogma that they would rather kill their own children than let them get
this essential vitamin.

* Vegans and vegetarians almost always live more decadent lifestyles
than healthy omnivorous eaters. Almost 90% of the vegans I interviewed
classify themselves as Wiccan or Neo-pagan. Followers of these cults
are infamous for their unhealthy behaviour. They often foster
unhealthy "polyamorous" relationships which spread venereal diseases.
They are known to be aquaphobic and avoid bathing or showering, under
the pretense that filth makes them "closer to the Earth." These
delusional habits are very likely tied to brain damage caused by
vitamin B-12 deficiency as explained above.

I seriously urge all vegetarians and vegans to reconsider the health
implications of their lifestyle, especially if they have or plan to
have children. While veganism may be merely unhealthy for a grown
adult, it can absolutely cripple a child whose development depends on
a well-balanced diet of both meats and vegetables.

Thank you, and God bless!

Trolling is dying (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925145)

It is official; Slashdot confirms: Trolling is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered trolling community when Slashdot confirmed that trolling market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all users. Coming on the heels of a recent Slashdot survey which plainly states that trolling has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Trolling is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent trolling comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict trolling's future. The hand writing is on the wall: trolling faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for trolling because trolling is dying. Things are looking very bad for trolling. As many of us are already aware, trolling continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

Open source trolling is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core posters. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time troll developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: trolling is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

Political troll leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of political trolling. How many users of feminist trolling are there? Let's see. The number of political troll versus feminist troll posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 feminist trollers. Homosexuality troll posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of feminist troll posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of homosexuality trolling. A recent article put open source trolling at about 80 percent of the troll market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 open source troll users. This is consistent with the number of open source troll Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Slashdot, abysmal posts and so on, open source trolling went out of business and was taken over by war trollers who post another troubled troll entirely. Now war trolling is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that trolling has steadily declined in market share. Trolling is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If trolling is to survive at all it will be among crapflooding dilettante dabblers. Trolling continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, trolling is dead.

Fact: Trolling is dying

waggly cocks (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925162)

fuck you, you are dumb.

I love the Matrix! I love CobboyNeal poll options! I love linux user-interfaces! I love Freedom-to-download-movies-and-music-I-don't-own! I hate the DMCA! I hate the RIAA! I hate M$/MicorocSpork/whtever the clever nickname today for moicrosoft is ! I hate HillaryRosen@kazaa I love to be an elite cracker/ spelling nazii WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

I've been flogging my cock with bamboo ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925235)

to make it extra leathery!

OWNED! :madlol:

WERD SON! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925243)

I just dipped my cock in liquid nitrogen!!!

HARD AS ROCK, BABY!!!

DIGTBK! (Damn It's Good To Be King)

MAD PROPZ TO PLAYA!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925248)

I'm getting the head of my cock chromed! H2D! (HOT TO DEFF)

JPEGs for font rendering examples? (5, Funny)

PhilHibbs (4537) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925146)

They're using JPEGs to show font rendering! LOL!

FUCK YOU, YOU ARE DUMB. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925172)

Anyone who uses the expression "lol" in a non-realtime-chat environment is a worthless piece of shit. nuff said.

FUCK YOU, YOU ARE DUMB. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925199)

Are you a fucking retard? You are not chatting. You do not need to use the expression "lol" in a fucking post.

How dumb are you? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925209)

When you are on the phone with your fat, loose-vagina, carbuncle ridden, brood-mother of a mother, do you say out-loud "ell oh ell" I found that statement humorous! You are an idiot.

Re:JPEGs for font rendering examples? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925218)

Phil Hibbs? I doubt that is your real name. If it were your real name, I would say:

Phil Hibbs is a phony piece of shit, and a poor typist. He probably has a miniscule penis and has never touched a woman in his life.

Phil Hibbs has a micropenis!

i want to shit in your mouth (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925221)

By "LOL" you probably mean, "lick oral labia"

or perhaps, "I am a nigger-sex-slave."

PHILHIBBS HAS SEX WITH TRAFFIC CONES (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925236)

Re:JPEGs for font rendering examples? (4, Interesting)

FyRE666 (263011) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925366)

Not only that, but the Anti-aliasing examples look a bit suspicious to me.

I recently installed KDE 3.1 onto my Gentoo machine (it's usually a headless box, but I was curious to see the improvements in KDE). The sans-serif fonts were all very nice, but bring up Slashdot with the "Times" font and it looked horrific! I'm not saying that /. is the last word in beautiful Web design, but the anti-aliasing actually made it look worse. I might try throwing some Windows fonts onto the box to see if it's better at some point...

FUCK YOU, YOU ARE DUMB. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925147)

Holy shit Batman! I nearly fell out of my chair because of a minor update to some minor Linux library! Tie me up and call me Nancy! What a vital piece of news!

How long... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925148)

[i]Read the full review with screenshots at MadPenguin.org...[/i]

Foolish human. Morbo will Slashdot your server! Mwahaha...

waggly cocks (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925157)

Standing before his troops Optimus Prime took a last look at Teletran and surveyed the scene. Across the monumental wall of pixels fires burned as the remains of a power plant smoldered in the dawn light.
"As you can see the Decepticons have hit and ran this morning outside of Seattle. All we can do now is clean up after them and look for clues to what they might be up to."
"Damn! And Ah whanted a piece of action too!"
Turning back Prime looked over his troops team of Autobots. "Sorry Ironhide, but you're staying behind. With our forces stretched out I can only spare a few of you. Mirage, Hound, and Huffer, you're in charge of putting out those fires.
"But Prime... I'm not a fire engine, what can I do?"
Prime shock his head ever so slightly, "Huffer... just do it, I know you'll think of something..."
The purple mech looked down at his feet and furrowed his brow. "I don't know Prime... I not ve-"
"Huffer... just do it!"
"Okay..."
"And take Gears too... I'm sure you two will work well together..."
Toward the back of the group Gears bit his lip, "Damn... I'm stuck with Huffer... Prime must hate me... I knew it... nobody like me..."
"Wheelejack, you and Ratchet go scour the debris for anything unusual. Use whatever equipment necessary, just be one the road in five minutes!"
Wheelejack saluted as his headlights beamed, "Yes sir! Finally, a chance to field test my All-Access-Scanner!"
Meanwhile Ratchet also bit his lip and doubted his fortune. "this will end in fire...'
"What was that Ratchet?"
"Oh nothing Wheeljack ... so... how does your AS- err... new invention work?"
"Glad you asked," Wheelejack said, as he motioned to the medic to follow him to his lab.
"And Bumblebee, I want you on recon. We don't want the Cons getting the drop on us while the others are away. Feel free to take Spike with you."
"Spike looked up from his seat on the consol. "Cool! I'll take this stereo I found with us!"
Grabbing the blue and silver radio Spike slipped off and hopped in the transformed Bumblebee.
Prime watch as the yellow bug sped off leaving a slight trail of burnt rubber on the floor. "You have your orders, now transform and roll out!"
Stepping back to Teletran Prime proceeded to access more reports worldwide as the sound of transforming filled the spacious room.
"Come on Phrime! Lemme go with 'em! I bet the Cons'll be back and I want a piece of the action!" Ironhide begged.
Narrowing his optics Prime turned back to his second, then glanced back at Teletran. On a corner screen the ends of his troops could be see as the drove out of the Ark and into the deserted wastelands of Washington.
"Ironhide... we have much to discuss..." Prime said sternly. "In my ready room... NOW!"
Ironhide winced as Prime used his 'I'm-in-charge-and-don't-you-forget-it!' tone. Then followed him into the darkened room.
Stepping behind his large desk Optimus Prime took a seat and pushed a series of buttons across the table top. Sealing the door behind Ironhide. Locking it tight, then focusing a brighter light on the red mech.
Rapping his big blue hand on the metal Prime sighed, "Ironhide... you can't keep doing this..."
"Doing what? Ah ain't done nothin!"
"Nothing? After I fought Megatron last battle you patted me on the aft."
"Yeah... Ah've seen them humans doing it! It's like a high-five."
"You held your hand there for ten seconds..." Prime said, narrowing his optics again.
"Ah'm still getting' the hang of it..."
"And what about those looks during the briefing?"
"We're all lookin' at you, you're our leader..."
"And the lip puckering?" Again, Prime's optics closed a fraction more. Soon, he would be talking with his eyes closed.
"Sour energon candy?" Ironhide replied, pulling the answer out of subspace.
"Listen Ironhide... I understand how you feel... really... but I can't have this. The others won't stand for it. And I don't want to lose you as my second!"
Ironhide leaned in and slapped his hands down on Prime's desk, "But Phrime... I can't help but-"
"No old friend, you can't, but I can't help it either. The others would understand." Optimus said, as he pushed another button.
On the desk Ironhide felt as if his hands were suddenly fussed to the desk. "Phrime?"
Standing up Prime paced around to the front of the desk to stand behind Ironhide. "No Ironhide, they wouldn't want to hear about it, nor would they understand. So you've got to stop it. You've got to be punished...."
Ironhide could hear a hatch open from behind him, followed by the sound of metal sliding out of metal. "Phrime?"
Optimus looked down at his second's back... his first mate... if they were on a ship... which, in fact, they were. "Sorry, you've got to be taught a lesson... So this time, I'm on top!"

What good is this distro? (0, Interesting)

jkrise (535370) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925165)

From the referenced review:

I tried installing on an Intel Celeron 533MHz/128MB system... I was initially curious to see how well this release would run on a lower end system.(128MB - lower end for installing a distro?)

In plain English: It didn't.

If a distro needs anything faster than a 533 Celeron and/or more than 128MB RAM, it's got to be ranked as useless. From a Linux standpoint, though.

"The installation routine started fine .. but after ...using ReiserFS and a swap file, it hung. I tried this several times using different varieties of partition layouts and file systems, but it was a no go. The installer kept hang at the point where it verifies that the system is bootable."

In Plain English : A useless distro.

Re:What good is this distro? (1)

fymidos (512362) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925204)

In Plain English : A useless distro.

This is not from the article, you should really be more polite ....

Re:What good is this distro? (2, Interesting)

jkrise (535370) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925349)

The author of the referenced article himself claims that a Celeron 533 with 128MB RAM is a low-end system. Secondly, he doesn't appear to have the necessary skills to trouble-shoot the problem, yet his review is referenced here! (seems to me, something wrong with the mobo - probably would've failed an XP instln as well, who knows?)

My point is, do Slashdot folks need slick GUIs and features, or, a working distro that does good h/w detection and is more robust? I'd place my money on the latter criterion, however slick the 'Experience'. Hence my sharp comment.

Re:What good is this distro? (4, Insightful)

Looke (260398) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925339)

It didn't fail because of 533 MHz and 128 MB RAM, it failed because of some incompatible hardware. Thats's a big difference, and claiming that Libranet draws too much resources is simply ridiculous.

Be careful with your quoting as well. Your mix of article quotes and personal comments is really misleading.

Re:What good is this distro? (2, Interesting)

jkrise (535370) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925355)

"claiming that Libranet draws too much resources is simply ridiculous."

If you read the ref. article, you'll see that he calls it a low-end system. He's sort of implying the distro failed to install due to lack of resources. IMO, the review is neither professional, nor thorough.

"Be careful with your quoting as well."

Point taken... I'm still figuring out with Momzilla on RH7.3 - some problems if I post HTML formatting - it seems to ignore para breaks. Sorry.

Re:What good is this distro? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925375)

One of my machines has a Celeron 300Mhz, 256Mb RAM.

I use Windows Mandrake and Knoppix with KDE once in a while.
I believe that I have used the machine with 128Mb.

It works very nice, and I have compiled mozilla and wine on it.

Re:What good is this distro? (1)

Martigan80 (305400) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925392)

If a distro needs anything faster than a 533 Celeron and/or more than 128MB RAM, it's got to be ranked as useless. From a Linux standpoint, though.

Nope. This would not make it useless, with the cheap prices of hardware these days I don't think this complaint is enough. With the latest program offerings from this Distro it seems to offer more "candy" which takes more power. If you just want gnome and no 3D, little sound, and to be able to operate a few programs at once then a less bloated Distro is ideal, BUT just because the distro does not feed off of the lower-end computers does not make it worthless. That's like driving a Fiat 500 on the interstate and complaining that the speed limit is set too high because your car can't go that fast.

Re:What good is this distro? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925405)

I tried installing on an Intel Celeron 533MHz/128MB system... I was initially curious to see how well this release would run on a lower end system.(128MB - lower end for installing a distro?)

In plain English: It didn't.
This is a trend in computing in general - software, especially operating systems require ever more resources to do exactly the same thing. Windows XP needs the abovestated as a minimum to run. Win98SE would run fine on a Pentium 90 with 16mb of ram. The next version of Windows will probably require 512mb of ram and a 1.5ghz CPU just to check your email. With Microsoft and Apple, OS bloat is a matter of intention and incompetence - they bloat the OS, thereby depreciating the value of hardware thereby causing people to buy more new computers thereby sending them more $$$. With Linux, it is that most programmer geeks intensely tie their personal worth to the MHZ of their computer. This massive turnover of hardware means they jolly well only make software with computers made in the last 18months in mind, and since 98% of them/us are totally selfish in their computing concerns, this "bin it and buy a new one" mentality towards making software usable on non-latest hardware isn't going to change for the sake of efficiency.
My computer is an Athlon 875mhz with 512mb of ram & 7200rpm hdd - this should be fine as a desktop computer for a long time in theory, but WinXP from 2001 would run slowly on it, and Linux distros run like a dog on it. I know there is custom compiling and the like, but I can't be bothered and it shouldn't be needed anyway. No computer I've seen has been faster to use from an end-user standpoint than my DX4-100 with Windows 3.11.

To need such a ghz computer to just boot up at a decent speed is nuts - there was a time a decade ago when Unix had different principals, when hackers were hackers and not just selfish fun-centric ultra ghz 20somethings, when many a Unix had a lighter footprint than Windows (and Windows was feather light back then compared with now).

Should I care about a new distro coming out? When I know it will run slowly on my computer and I will be forced to upgrade all the time because Linux is always needing security patches and the software turnover rate such that nobody without broadband can keep up. And if I used Linux fulltime, that even if I got a brand new computer, that I'd be forced to upgrade it every couple of years to run the thing at the same speed because Linux bloats so fast. If Linux's objective on the desktop is to do things 'right', then it is as bad at that objective as Windows is as a server OS, perhaps far worse. I used to think geeks were out of touch, but I now think most just don't even care.

Re:What good is this distro? (1)

GaveUp (190969) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925597)

The lack of installing I can guarantee was due to some incompatible hardware. Up until a few weeks ago when the harddrive went out in my laptop I had been running Libranet on it for over a year and had no problems and this was a P266mmx laptop w/ 96ram. The only thing that Libranet may need more of than a standard debian install, out of the box anyway, is HD space as it installs a few more things by default.

From a newish GNU/Linux user (3, Insightful)

mike_c999 (513531) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925166)

To me this seems realy quite good.
It sets up many of the thing a new linux user wants by default. (AA fonts for one)This is somthing that realy is a must 'cus theres nothing worse than trying to read crappy fonts, and its a big put off when you try and change.

I know things like this are relativly simple, but there not when you're new.

Mike

Can we stop this Debian myth now please.. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925167)

If you wan't the latest and greatest (!) then you'd simply use the Sid branch of Debian. Sure probably lots of things don't work but oh you'd have the latest.

If you are more sane then you can simply track the Unstable branch. This is a good tradeoff for people who don't like the relatively old packages found in Stable.

In other words you have a choice. You can also use numerous unoffical apt-get sources for such stuff.

Stop thsi Debian myth now.

Re:Can we stop this Debian myth now please.. (5, Informative)

rembo (630341) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925180)

Well, talking about stopping myths...

SID is the same as unstable, the developement branch.

Testing which I think you confused with unstable is now sarge. It will be the next stable when it is finnished. Packages from unstable flow to testing when there are no dependency problems and critical bugs

Current stable is woody. Woody only gets security updates from debian. This is to ensure that a running system will not break because of an upgrade of software. But there are many backports available of newer software on www.apt-get.org

Re:Can we stop this Debian myth now please.. (1)

pigeon (909) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925192)

I have tried al tree branches of Debian. I love Debian on my servers, and stable and testing work great on them. But for the workstation, I found Debian unacceptable. Testing was simply not actual enough, and unstable too often broke. So for my workstations I have switched to OS X wheneever possible, and on x86 I am experimenting with gentoo and even considering *gasp*.. redhat.. Libranet sounds great, but for 40 $ I think I'd rather look somewhere else.

Re:Can we stop this Debian myth now please.. (2, Insightful)

psavo (162634) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925461)

what are you talking about? Debian/Sid has been broken only 2 times so far (after woody came out), and I dist-upgrade every night at 23:45.

And what the hell is wrong with that 'article', is that one more of those 'paidrticles'? 'fell off my chair', now, there's someone in need to meet a woman (or a man, whatever).

Re:Can we stop this Debian myth now please.. (0, Flamebait)

10Ghz (453478) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925324)

How long did it take for Xfree 4.2 to appear on Debian unstable? How long did it take for KDE3 to appear on Debian unstable?

"Debian myth"? I don't think so.

Re:Can we stop this Debian myth now please.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925387)

As usual, you're ignoring the fact that the Debian XFree86 maintainers are the only ones doing much work on XFree86 on several of the platforms which XFree86 runs on, and that the Debian XFree86 4.2 is actually quite different from the 'normal' one, and as such it isn't surprising it takes a while for it to appear.

As for KDE3, as you might know, there were a hell of a lot of other changes going on at the time which meant that KDE3 was delayed a lot. It's not as if there weren't Debian packages made available in a whole lot of other places, though.

Re:Can we stop this Debian myth now please.. (0, Flamebait)

10Ghz (453478) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925414)

You know what? I don't care. I don't care that if there were some big changes going on (how come other distros didn't suffer from these big changes (like GCC3-migration)?). All I care is that are the packages available. Many people like to say "Just run Unstable if you want the absolute bleeding-edge", when the fact is that unstable is not bleeding edge either. Big and important packages can be delayed for months while other distros are already happily running them.

Yes I know that there were KDE3-packages available. But were those packages part of Unstable? Nope. Therefore unstable was not "bleeding edge".

Re:Can we stop this Debian myth now please.. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925451)

What's in a name?

Debian's myth of not being up to date, is partly the result of, well, not the best marketing: the distribution is divided into stable, testing and unstable. Stable is where most newcomers look, wouldn't you, for the current working distro. It sounds reassuring. However, unstable is a bit of a misnomer, because while we understand that it is not "guaranteed" in the same way to be stable, it is by no means unstable, it is rather where the new stuff is to be found, and what most newcommers to Linux are looking for, the latest and greatest, and yes you do run the occasional risk of running into mishaps.

Debian should seriously consider changing the name unstable, or providing an another alias that is a bit more reassuring - Sid is one, but Sid now maps to unstable.

I am not sure what would do the trick, I would suggest depreciating the name "unstable" for "development" or something more snazzy like "cutting-edge".

Whilst at it, Debian developers should get on with it and borrow more quickly from Knoppix, offer a re-mastered jigdo version of it as an alternative installer... Installation should be as quick and painless as possible. (i forget Debian is very concerned about catering for a multitude of processors that makes this difficult ... but still)

It is post installation Debian installation that is such a joy (and i don't care what i use so long as i get it!).

No other distro i have used comes close when it comes to ease of management, and keeping up to date; and i a factoring time as an important element here. I use Gnu/Linux to do things other than Gnu/Linux. (well for source based distros i am curious about Sourcerer, and its related branches Source Madge, and Lunar Linux)...

But post installation Debian gets the balance right between keeping up to date, and time spent.

Think Debian :-)

Debian is many things, but (1)

joeflies (529536) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925520)

I don't think that it's easy to say that it's a good desktop platform for those who don't know how to setup a desktop platform.

You have to take into consideration that many of the configurations take considerable knowledge, and even the most basic things require a lot of documentation reading to get working (such as choosing a print spooler among many, enabling true type fonts on your own when the HOWTOs talk about xfs, xft, etc which may or may not apply to your system, learning the Debian-way of doing things that are different from most any other distro, such as not editing modules.conf or configuring XF86Config in a way that dpkg-reconfigure doesn't blow it away). Even using EXT3 requires knowlege of using LILO to boot into 2.4 kernel, and for people that don't know that, it can be a frustrating experience to install Debian on their own for desktop use.

I think that this libranet is a good idea, and hopefully it will pick up some steam for the "other" people who want to come to Debian but need a middle ground.

Pathetic (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925174)

"...I just about fell out of the chair I was sitting in."

My god. That was one of the most pathetic things I have ever read.

Re:Pathetic (1)

bazik (672335) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925291)

I bet he had shit his pants when they had announced to ship it with AOL for Linux.

debian and gnome (0, Interesting)

Miguel de Icaza (660439) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925182)

the default way gnome is configured in most debian-baded distros is appalling and unusable. The deb package maintainers seem to have no appreciation of the way the gnome registry should be used. At least here the font AA looks as good as KDE - but unless debian addresses gnome users are going do be driven to the less than free KDE desktop which is a shame frankly IMO.

good work libranet team

love

miguel

Re:debian and gnome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925197)

See even Miguel hates debian!

Re:debian and gnome (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925212)

Registry / .not / mono !

What the hell is driving you to MS? Alot of people don't like the direction you seem to want gnome to head. Claiming KDE is sorta less than free while you are busy trying to clone a patent mined technology produced by one of the most virulant software companies in recent memory is absurd to say least.

Yeah.. Libranet is Great & wonderful (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925185)



But it crashed on him, serveral times, during a partition/installation. So, this "review" constitutes him praising Anti Aliasing and a bunch of useless crap you can find in any other distro.

I don't understand. (3, Insightful)

termos (634980) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925188)

What I really don't understand is why some distros supply screenshots on their webpage, or why there is screenshots in reviews. If this was redhat, with it's special kde & gnome mixture thing (correct me if i am wrong), it would be OK, but this is just plain KDE 3.x. I am running Debian myself, and I don't see any difference in this KDE and the KDE I am using, okey there is a few new icons, but that would be the only thing.
And what is the big deal with Libranet beeing shipped with KDE 3.1 anyway? It's not that new and debian unstable has had it for some time now. The same with Linux 2.4.20, it has been stable for some time now, and it's not new! Still it is looking nice for the desktop with it's GUI frontends for package management, and maybe it has some other nice tools as well.

Re:I don't understand. (0, Flamebait)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925205)

I think its to show off the MS fonts.

Fonts in Unix SUCK! With a capital S. Only recently during the last 2 years did X and kde even have anti aliagned and true type fonts. The fonts provided are mediocre but a huge improvment. Windows and MacOSX are much more appealing to my eyes and have alot of R&D went into developing them.

Try looking at Slashdot in Mozilla from Linux and then Windows. See the difference? The Windows platform looks 10 times better.

Also my monitor flickers at a lower hz in Linux then Windows. I typed in the correct horizontal and vertical hz ratings but its still behind. Another problem with X.

Re:I don't understand. (2, Insightful)

grahamlee (522375) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925215)

What I really don't understand is why some distros supply screenshots on their webpage, or why there is screenshots in reviews.

Because not all desktop PC users have used KDE 3.1 before, perchance?

I recently helped a friend to install RedHat 8 on his laptop (no mean achievement...the PCMCIA hardware wouldn't play ball but that's a different thread), and the one thing he was most worried about was whether or not he'd be able to work out how to use the browser/mail client/office software/etc. As you could probably imagine, he wanted to know whether he could do normal stuff first, kernel hacking later.

So to him, the ability to see screenshots of the window manager in advance would have definitely been A Good Thing, and the distributors should supply such screen shots if they would like newbies to come to their distro. Imagine if he'd installed it, wanted to check his e-mail and found that it defaulted to twm, or even Window Maker.

If this was redhat, with it's special kde & gnome mixture thing (correct me if i am wrong)

RedHat doesn't mix GNOME and KDE, it supplies both but defaults to GNOME. What you're probably thinking of is BlueCurve, their custom home-grown skins for both window managers that are intended to nullify the difference between the two. Also in an abstract way it makes them look not dissimilar to Windows XP user interface, which is another bonus for switchers.

Re:I don't understand. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925276)

if you don't understand then get the fuck out of here. It's THAT simple.

Re:I don't understand. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925485)

Ah yes... another upstanding representative of the Linux community hard at work.

Jerkoff.

sdfadffd (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925193)

Knopix damit!

I wish I knew where I could find the MS fonts (3, Informative)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925194)

Microsoft took them off their website when it was discovered that Linux users were downloading them.

I use FreeBSD and fonts are one of the reasons why I still do development on Windows with my computer. The fonts look 10 times better and are more pleasing to the eyes.

I use true type and anti aliagned fonts in X but they do not look as good as Microsoft's or Apple's.

If anyone knows of a website where I can download them that would be greatly appreciated.

Re:I wish I knew where I could find the MS fonts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925211)

If anyone knows of a website where I can download them that would be greatly appreciated.

I know one, it was the fourth hit on google: http://goatse.cx [sourceforge.net]

Re:I wish I knew where I could find the MS fonts (1)

runderwo (609077) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925301)

I'm confused. Does a post get modded as a troll if the link is labelled goatse, but points to the right place?

Re:I wish I knew where I could find the MS fonts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925391)

Sure. (Score: Troll +1)

Re:I wish I knew where I could find the MS fonts (1)

markov_chain (202465) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925255)

I've never encountered a font, on any platform (or at least linux, windows, dos, mac, atari st, amiga, sun), that looks better for text editing and writing code than the default fixed 6x9 font used by xterms. The characters are small enough not to be overly wasteful of space, but somehow appear very clear and unambiguous-- they are drawn really well.

Re:I wish I knew where I could find the MS fonts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925331)

This seems odd to me. Many linux users continually berate MS, claiming that their products are rubbish - but are willing to use their fonts. Have I missed something?

Re:I wish I knew where I could find the MS fonts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925343)

Many linux users continually berate MS, claiming that their products are rubbish - but are willing to use their fonts. Have I missed something?

Haven't you ever looked through someone else's rubbish? Every once in a while you you find some small piece of "treasure" :D

Re:I wish I knew where I could find the MS fonts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925346)

This seems odd to me. Many linux users continually berate MS, claiming that their products are rubbish - but are willing to use their fonts. Have I missed something?
So you're telling us that all it takes for rubbish software to become non-rubbish is... good fonts?

Nice, simple quality control!

What I would like to know. (1)

foolip (588195) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925195)

Does anyone know if Libranet categorizes software into main, contrib and non-free so that one could easily avoid the non-free things the reviewer mentions:

* Opera 6.0
* RealPlayer
* Flash (could be a free version?)
* Java (perhaps not the non-free one either?)
* MS TrueType fonts
* NVidia 3d accelerated drivers for X

He says "Libranet is 100% compatible with Debian" so I guess one could remove the non-free sources from sources.list?

Re:What I would like to know. (1)

Dot.Com.CEO (624226) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925222)

I'm really curious, why do you want to avoid all those things? I understand Opera, for example, you either pay or you get those hideous banners, but what is the problem with the rest? Assuming, of course, you want to build a workstation, not a server, for which case Libranet is a bit of a wrong solution imho.

Re:What I would like to know. (2, Insightful)

foolip (588195) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925250)

The reason is quite simple. As a Free Software [gnu.org] follower, I don't want to use any software which doesn't give the freedoms/rights I want for myself and everyone else.

In less abstract terms: I don't want to agree to Reals license agreements or use their software, because it doesn't allow to do the things I should be allowed to do: study how it works, make changes to it and distribute derivative works (I would need the source code, and permission to use it for this to be possible). If you hang on a while I'll post another reply with some extracts from some of the EULAs.

I frequently get bashed here at slashdot for saying such things, but if don't have any control over the software (i.e. it's proprietary and/or non-free), then I don't want to use it -- no matter how good it is. If you want to know some of the reasons why non-free software is bad then go read up on GNU's philosophy section [gnu.org] . Even if you find you don't agree with the GNU philosophy, you should know about it, because any GNU/Linux system (including Libranet) is build on and with GNU tools (and a lot of other of course, GNU should'nt be getting all the credit).

Re:What I would like to know. (1)

foolip (588195) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925329)

Here are a few examples:

  • Opera 6.0
    I can't get my hands on a license without downloading the software :(
  • RealPlayer
    The same thing. They obviously don't want us to read it unecessarily :)
  • Flash [macromedia.com]
    You may not alter, merge, modify, adapt or translate the Software, or decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, or otherwise reduce the Software to a human-perceivable form. That's more clear cut, and straight out said than in most licenses :)
    ...
    You may not modify the Software or create derivative works based upon the Software.
    ...
    You may not export the Software into any country prohibited by the United States Export Administration Act and the regulations thereunder.
    Which I guess means that Cubans, Lybians, Iranians, North Koreans, Syrians and some others can't use the software, but I may well be wrong as for which nationalities this is.
  • Java [sun.com]
    Except as specifically authorized in any Supplemental License Terms, you may not make copies of Software, other than a single copy of Software for archival purposes. Unless enforcement is prohibited by applicable law, you may not modify, decompile, or reverse engineer Software.
    ...
    You may not modify the Java Platform Interface ("JPI", identified as classes contained within the "java" package or any subpackages of the "java" package), by creating additional classes within the JPI or otherwise causing the addition to or modification of the classes in the JPI.
    ...
    You acknowledge that the Software may automatically download, install, and execute applets, applications, software extensions, and updated versions of the Software from Sun ("Software Updates")
  • NVidia drivers [nvidia.com]
    ... SOFTWARE designed exclusively for use on the Linux operating system may be copied and redistributed, provided that the binary files thereof are not modified in any way (except for unzipping of compressed files).
    ...
    Customer may not reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the SOFTWARE, nor attempt in any other manner to obtain the source code.

As you see, the licenses limit the terms of use , modification and redistribuation of the software in ways which are to me not acceptable.

Re:What I would like to know. (1)

FyRE666 (263011) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925411)

I understand your viewpoint for most of the examples there (Flash especially - as having the source would mean I could actually compile it for my Mac PPC running Gentoo). However, I'm very happy with Nvidia releasing their own drivers for their own hardware. They work great, and I doubt anyone could do a better job. I believe that about any low-level hardware drivers; if they work well for my distros, then I'm happy. If they don't then I return the hardware (luckily many manufacturers, when they mention "Linux" compatibility, don't specify a distro, so you have a leg to stand on when returning the product).

Re:What I would like to know. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925563)

Nvidia's drivers are tricky.
Let's say I have an old nvidia graphics card. Nvidia decides one day to stop supporting it. No more drivers and so no more bugfixes. I am screwed. If the drivers were free, then I could fix them myself or hire someone to fix them.

In the graphics card world this is unlikely, since graphics cards are upgraded every few months.

Re:What I would like to know. (1)

cathyy (120691) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925320)

Yes, it is separated into the main, contrib, non-free areas, just as the Debian tree is.

Re:What I would like to know. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925508)

Oh gosh! I just realized these nice fonts I'm using aren't free as in liberty! I feel so tainted.
apt-get remove msttcorefonts
Ah, that's better. Now I have the freedom to modify these great pixmap fonts, and I can rest safe in the knowledge that my hard work won't be stolen by M$ in their quest to embrace and extend pixmap fonts! When I find the emacs module to edit them, I can make them readable as well!

Mad about Libranet 2.8 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925214)

hen I heard about Libranet 2.8 containing KDE 3.1 and kernel 2.4.20 in our forums, I just about fell out of the chair I was sitting in. As you all probably already know, Libranet is a Debian-based distro aimed toward the desktop user. Until now, I had never heard of a Debian release with all the newest goodies, but my world was about to get turned upside down.

I went to their site to check it out and the list got even bigger and more impressive. Here are a few highlights:

* Kernel 2.4.20
* XFree86 4.3.0
* KDE 3.1, GNOME 2.2.1, IceWM, Fluxbox, etc.
* Mozilla 1.3/Opera 6.0
* RealPlayer
* Flash
* MS TrueType fonts
* OpenOffice.org 1.0.2
* Automatic hardware detection (gasp)

I was sold. Had to have it for review.

Well, I got my copy and here I am, getting ready to tell the world my story. Was it all I was dreaming it was? Debian has always held a spot in my heart for many reasons, but not one of them has to do with it being a desktop distro. Debian is a server. Was this just a prejudice or a reality? Read on.

Installing Libranet

Simply put, the installation routine was extremely simple. Granted, a modest amount of Linux knowledge is required, but compared to other commercial distros, it is very well done. Everything is clear and concise... the whole thing flows in a logical structure. Nothing really felt like it was out of place except for one small detail: The common Debian mid-install reboot. It is not uncommon for a traditional Debian installation to setup the base system and then reboot to install the packages to complete the distro.

I'm getting a little ahead of myself here, but I'm excited about this distro so bear with me. My goal was to test this release on two different systems. One is an AMD Athlon XP 1600+/512MB and the other is an Intel Celeron 533MHz/128MB system. I attempted to install on the Celeron first because I was initially curious to see how well this release would run on a lower end system. In plain English: It didn't.

The installation routine started fine when I booted the system from the first CD, but after I partitioned the drive using ReiserFS and a swap file, it hung. I tried this several times using different varieties of partition layouts and file systems, but it was a no go. The installer kept hang at the point where it verifies that the system is bootable. Interesting issue, but I didn't take time to troubleshoot since I had another, faster, system. The drive I was installing to is in a hot swap tray, so I pulled it from the Celeron system and moved it over to the AMD.

The first thing that the installer informed me of during the partition phase on the AMD system was that the partition table on HDA was corrupt. All I did to correct this was reconfigure it and the installer made it past the boot device detection phase just fine this time. This is rather interesting, as the Celeron system is running on an Intel 440LX chipset, whereas the newer system is running on the AMD761 chipset. One would think that it would be more apt (no pun intended) to install on the 440LX with no issues.

Moving right along, it installed the base system after I partitioned the drive (it defaulted to ReiserFS and I kept that choice. ReiserFS is my preferred file system for one reason: speed). This process took less than three minutes, and then it was off to the first and only reboot. When the system came back up, it prompted me to set up the X server and I obliged. This is where the newest Libranet release really started to shine. Libranet has included a wonderful auto detection feature that detected the video card flawlessly. It even asked if I wanted to use the 2D nv dummy driver or the 3D accelerated nvidia driver. I chose the 2D so that I could install my own later from nvidia's web site. Everything went well here. It asked several pertinent questions such as preferred resolution, monitor info, etc., after which it tested the setup. Looking good.

After X was configured, the next shining example of the Libranet team's hard work was the graphical package installer... more along the lines of the GUI version of dselect. In a way, it is reminiscent of Red Hat, SuSE, or Mandrake's managers. Not so much in looks, but as in functionality. You are presented with a list of categories and are given the choice to make selections within those categories. Once you're done, the installer copies your choices to the hard drive and configures them for use in typical Debian fashion. Very fast. It installed around 1.7GB of data in just under 16 minutes.

Once the installer was finished, it asked that I remove the CD and then X Windows started. I was in my new Libranet system.

The good, the bad, and the anti-aliased

I must say that, after logging in through GDM (the Libranet default login manager), the first thing I noticed was everything was anti-aliased, the fonts were beautiful, and even the individual applications such as OpenOffice.org and Mozilla were built with AA support. This distro is stunning to look at. It gives the big boys a run for their money. KDE and GNOME are both setup this way, and everything looks excellent.

The next point of interest was the Libranet XAdminMenu. This is basically the control center for the distro, and where the developers have placed effort well spent. From this application you can do everything from installing/removing packages to recompiling the kernel (more on that in a minute).

One feature inside the AdminMenu that stood out was the availability to install several desktop-oriented packages such as Flash, Java, RealPlayer, and last but definitely not least... MS TrueType fonts... all with the click of a mouse button.

The font installer really caught my attention and I installed that option before anything else. I wanted to see what fonts were included in that package. I was in for a treat. After the installation, I launched OpenOffice to try the new fonts out. I was greeted with some great looking fonts. Here is a screenshot of a few of them. Not too shabby at all.

The next stop in the AdminMenu for me was to install Flash and Java for Mozilla. Both were easily installed. Java from CD2 and Flash was downloaded from the net. Everything went off without a hitch except for RealPlayer, which came back with an error indication that it could not find the requested file (it was going to the net for the RealPlayer install). I gave up and just downloaded it on my own after it failed twice.

On to the package manager. Libranet has out done themselves with this one. Debian just got a whole lot simpler folks. The package manager is pretty much the same thing as the one used during the initial system setup as far as I can tell. It is very clean and functional. Everything works perfectly. You select the category of software you need and then select what package(s) in that category you want. Very easy. For those Debian die-hards who would still like to use apt-get from the shell or front ends such as the Synaptic GUI and aptitude curses frontend, they are all still available... no worries.

One other thing I like about this distro is the sheer volume of applications available on the two disc set, the likes of which can only be rivaled by SuSE Linux in my opinion. To add to that, you can download many more from the Internet through the Debian apt-get install system. Libranet is 100% compatible with Debian, so you can expect all of the same packages to run on it as well. This gives the Libranet user so much freedom and choice you can almost taste it.

Video performance on the system was solid, but not exceptional. I was able to run glxgears consistently around 3300fps whereas on other systems I have experienced higher framerates. On Slackware 9, for instance, close to 5000fps can be achieved with the same card and drivers. This is using an MSI G4-MX440 8X 128MB AGP card.

And the coolest #1 feature is...

I have to say that, even though Libranet 2.8 is loaded with great features, the number one coolest feature is the option in the AdminMenu to recompile the kernel. This is not a new feature to 2.8, but I'll tell you it has got to be the biggest time saver for the veteran Linux user who likes to tweak their kernel. With a click of a button, I can bring up menuconfig and change whatever kernel settings I like, and then recompile without ever having to type things like make dep, make modules, cp arch/i386.... blah blah blah. You know the routine. I'm not saying that this is difficult, but this feature in Libranet makes compiling your kernel seem like making a font selection in OpenOffice.org... that simple.

Note to newbies: This is still a very dangerous area for an unexperienced user to be playing around. Use with caution. If you think the windows registry is intimidating, keep in mind that it is a fisher price toy compared to the Linux kernel config. :)

Glitches, gotchas, and other minor irritations

No review is complete without a list of things that don't work quite right, are buggy, or just plain annoying... and Libranet is no exception. While they are minimal, they still need to be mentioned. All in all though, the goods FAR outweigh the bads.

First up in my list of "bad things" is the way Libranet has organized the panel menus. Almost every category has a Debian submenu (see screenshot below). This really isn't necessary and it kind of reminds me of the Red Hat Extras or SuSE SuSE menus. They are pretty pointless and need to go away. Maybe just put the extra packages under the More program folder since it already exists. Or take the approach that Red Hat has in its 9.0 release and only list the critically important menu items, hide the rest, and let the advanced user add the ones they need to the menus. Some may argue that, but hey, it's just my opinion. That's all.

The next issue I found was that every time I rebooted the machine, the master volume would zero itself out. I would have no sound when the system started. This is easily fixed by saving whatever volume settings you wish as the system default. Again, no big deal, but still a bug. I haven't seen this yet in any other distro of the same caliber.

The skinny

All in all, Libranet is a well-rounded Linux distro. It installs as easy, if not easier, than 90% of the distros available today. This is even considering that half of the install is text mode. For veterans, this isn't such a big deal at all, as most of us even prefer it to the slow GUI installers... but for a newbie this is still a simple process.

Automatic hardware detection is almost flawless. I tested the installation on several "brand name" machines and only once did the hardware detection fail... and even then very minimally. It was on a Compaq Deskpro, and a suitable driver could not be found by the installer.

The desktop experience is consistent, smooth, and glitch free (aside from the issues with the panel menu I mentioned earlier). During the whole review and trial process, the system NEVER crashed, froze, or did anything out of the ordinary. The experience was almost flawless.

If you are new to Linux, this should be one of your first choices. SuSE is one of my personal favorites, and Libranet is close in functionality, but runs much faster. Same goes for Red Hat and Mandrake Linux. This distro is great.

If you're a long time Linux guru, all I have to say is it's Debian. To top that, it makes a great desktop. If anyone says anything about Lindows here, I quit. Who wants my job? :) In my opinion, the only thing that comes close is Xandros, but that's a whole different game. Xandros is a great distro, but is mainly geared toward Windows converts... Libranet could also be a great conversion distro, but it doesn't bend over backward trying to do so. I'm not saying that Xandros is bad for doing that, because I applaud them for a job well done. They have an excellent package. Libranet is just more apt to be adopted by everyday Linux users as a desktop system.

The last thing I have to say is to support the developers at Libranet and purchase a copy if you have the funds. You can check out their pricing and purchase a copy from their site. Prices aren't really too bad for what you get either. The download edition starts at USD $39.95 and the CD version starts at USD $44.95.

In so many words, Libranet 2.8 is well worth the price of admission, if not more. Check it out.

MadPenguin out >:)

Knoppix (4, Informative)

Effugas (2378) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925219)

While LibraNet is certainly impressive, I must mention that Knoppix provides the "cutting edge" traits mentioned -- KDE 3.1, Linux-2.4.20-xfs, etc. -- with the bonus of the most mature automatic hardware detection algorithms in the x86 space.

And once you run knx-hdinstall, apt-get is more than happy to function normally.

Knoppix is very fun to see spread through schools; it's exponential growth at its finest :-)

Yours Truly,

Dan Kaminsky
DoxPara Research
http://www.doxpara.com

Re:Knoppix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925310)

wow oh wow .. a Debian release with all the newest goodies??? Let's party like it's 2003!

Re:Knoppix (1)

Effugas (2378) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925419)

I was just commenting how odd it was that the Prince track, once looking forward to an exciting future, now referred to a booming past...

You should try Knoppix. It's like one day, the instant-satisfaction of console systems hit the PC realm.

--Dan

PF? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925220)


this is not the first post! go to hell, u all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Just wondering.... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925225)

I have earlier been informed that when something contains code released under the GPL, it must also be released "...at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License.." (GPL).

Libranet seems very interesting to check out. Running Debian stable myself, I wouldn't like having one extra Debian based distro, with newer stuff, yet quite stable.

However, Libranet takes money for their distribution, and GPL says you can take money for the physical transfer of the programme(/distro?) to a medium. DOwnloading is ,however, not a physical transfer in my eyes. Is this distro avaiable freely for download, or is there something I have missed about building a distro on GNU/GPL software? All other major distros I have seen are freely available, what makes this one different?

Somebody please enlighten me.

Re:Just wondering.... (1)

The Analog Kid (565327) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925275)

Well it has to be redistributable under the terms of the GPL, like with Red Hat 9 people were downloading it before they got to the mirrors from people that payed for it. People thought it was illegal but it isn't. So if you really want it you just have to look for a .torrent to download or something like that.

Re:Just wondering.... (4, Interesting)

mattrix2k (632351) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925342)

No, there is NO obligation under the GPL for a distro maker to host ISOs at their expensive for the benefit of freeloaders like yourself. "Free software rulez yeah! Gimme the source! What, I have to pay for it? I'll stick to my pirate copy of Wind0ze thanks."

At last, an up to date Debian (1)

pchown (90777) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925228)

My biggest gripe with Debian has always been its reluctance to include new software. If reliability is important, you should be conservative, but it doesn't mean I have to like it. :-) I'm pleased that there is a new Debian-based distro that doesn't force me to take this approach.

(For example, I do a lot with IPv6 because it's easier than setting up VPNs and then dealing with numbering conflicts. If I was going to be conservative, and avoid IPv6 on the grounds that it is too new, it would make my job harder.)

Debian and RedHat are important because they are free (as in liberty) distributions. I want the freedom to tinker with, and give away, the distribution, not just the software that it contains.

Re:At last, an up to date Debian (5, Insightful)

Munra (580414) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925251)

Debian does not force you to take this approach; you choose to.

If you wan't bleeding edge, use unstable/testing.

Yes -- Debian stable has programs that are (in some cases) slightly out of date, and do not have the features of newest releases. The clue is in the name, though; they have been rigourously tested for stability. If you want to sacrifice stability (aimed more at servers) for features (aimed more at desktops), use unstable/testing. You don't even have to have all programs as unstable/testing -- you can choose which ones to pin where.

When will people stop criticising Debian for being conservative when it isn't; Debian does have bleeding edge versions of most of the packages available, in the unstable/testing repositories. You *just* have to tell it to use them.

Now I'll have my coffee and moan less ;)

Manta

Re:At last, an up to date Debian (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925267)

Even in unstable it's more often than not pretty old stuff.. How long does it take to put kde3 in there..

Re:At last, an up to date Debian (1)

10Ghz (453478) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925337)

If you wan't bleeding edge, use unstable/testing.


Sorry, unstable/testing isn't really cutting edge either. It took 9 frigging months for Xfree 4.2 to appear in Unstable, and it took even longer for KDE3!

Re:At last, an up to date Debian (2, Informative)

eloki (29152) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925570)

Sorry, unstable/testing isn't really cutting edge either. It took 9 frigging months for Xfree 4.2 to appear in Unstable, and it took even longer for KDE3!

Yes, and that's where you lack the background context about why the above 2 things took a long time.

Incidentally, Debian is more unstable/cutting edge than you think. It has had gcc 3.2.3 pre-release versions for months, and the glibc maintainers seem to regularly do updates from CVS. The samba in unstable is 2.999alpha23. The new module utils for kernel 2.5 are already packaged for unstable as well... are you running 2.5?

The thing is that Debian is a de-facto portability test for XFree86, because Debian releases on over 10 architectures. The maintainer for the XFree86 packages doesn't package newer versions until he has them working on all architectures, and this takes time. I do find it annoying, but a laudable goal (it's not like new versions of XFree86 really give me that much anyway).

As for KDE, this was delayed further because of the transition to gcc 3.2, which had yet another different and incompatible ABI to gcc 3.0. It was felt it wasn't worth putting KDE in, only to have to go through a painful packaging transition for 3.2. Instead, the KDE maintainers just opted to wait for the transition to start before they entered Debian.

See, just because some things are slower than you expected doesn't mean the rest of unstable isn't in fact quite up-to-date, maybe more than you'd like :)

Re:At last, an up to date Debian (2, Insightful)

10Ghz (453478) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925603)

Yes, and that's where you lack the background context about why the above 2 things took a long time.


I'm well aware of the reasons for the delay. And guess what? I don't care for their reasons! All I care is that is the software in there or isn't it. And in this case, it wasn't. Other distros had them, Debian did not. So the people who say that Unstable is cutting-edge, are simply wrong. Perhaps it would be closer to the truth is they said "Unstable is more or less current, unless some big and important packages are againg being held back indefinitely because they are implementing some changes".

Yes, they were migrating to GCC3 and that was the cause for the delay. So what? fact remains that the software was delayed and that means that Unstable is not bleeding edge. That is a FACT. And that means that one should not do the "Debian unstable is bleeding edge" party-line if it's not true.

Of course, every other distro were also migrating to GCC3 back then, yet they were running the new software alot sooner than Debian was...

Perhaps other parts of Unstable are more current, but again: I don't care! I don't care if Unstable has YetAnotherApp0.05 whereas other distros still have YetAnotherApp0.04, if big and important packages are delayed. And Xfree and KDE are pretty damn big and important in my book!

Re:At last, an up to date Debian (1)

dmaxwell (43234) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925599)

Debian runs on more arches than any other Linux distro. It takes some doing to get something as large and as complex as XFree86 running acceptably on all of them. No, "Debian should only worry about x86 because everybody uses it." is not the answer. If it wasn't for Debian, many users of alternate arches would be out in the cold.

I'll grant that KDE3 took way too long. There was much wrangling over the GCC 3 and glibc 2.3 transistions. However, I survived on unofficial ports for much of that time.

Pay for downloading iso??? (2, Insightful)

tanveer1979 (530624) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925244)

I went to libranet site to see download options.
The Downloads [libranet.com] are not free!!. This is certainly a first from a linux distro. I doubt i will pay to download isos!!

Re:Pay for downloading iso??? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925269)

It's a second, actually. SuSE has been doing that for ages.

Re:Pay for downloading iso??? (2, Informative)

ctid (449118) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925279)

No it has not. You cannot download SuSE ISOs. You can download a live CD (for nothing) and then use that to install your distribution via FTP. This has been the case basically forever.

Re:Pay for downloading iso??? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925278)

The Downloads [libranet.com] are not free!!. This is certainly a first from a linux distro. I doubt i will pay to download isos!!

Last time I checked, Suse wasn't available for free download either. Oh wait, they appear to have a mirror on ftp://leet.hax0rs.ru.br.cr.sk.pl/tmp ... :-)

Re:Pay for downloading iso??? (2, Insightful)

mattrix2k (632351) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925322)

Well frankly that stinks of the whole "I want free as in speech, but only if it means it's free as in beer" attitude that is rampant on Slashdot.

When RedHat tried to make an honest buck from the product they worked on people just downloaded off BitTorrent. Here you are complaining that Libranet aren't hosting huge ISOs for free download at their expense (both in terms of bandwidth and the money spent creating the product).

Re:Pay for downloading iso??? (1)

rmohr02 (208447) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925449)

Well, Red Hat was going to put the isos up in a week. The fact that I had them three days earlier doesn't make me feel bad. I'll try to find somewhere to download Libranet, and if I like it, I'll pay for a copy.

Re:Pay for downloading iso??? (1)

reconn (578681) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925592)

As long as there is economic inequality in the world, no speech that you must pay for is free.

Let me start this first before they do it again... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925261)

Is Windows ready for the server?
Is Windows ready for the shell?
Is Windows ready for the 99.999%?
Is Windows ready for open standarts?
Is Windows ready for taking the competition with the best OS in the world?

Re:Let me start this first before they do it again (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925265)

If they measure the readyness of Linux for the Desktop by Windows measures.. Then Linux hopefully will never be "ready"!

So - which Linux is actually better? (1)

youaredan (668702) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925283)

I'm sure this has been asked and answered the world over - but, in light of this post - I'm left wondering what Linux distribution I should run... if I do at all. I run FreeBSD for all my server operations, and have used Windows for development, multimedia, etc for years. I run XP right now - with multiple monitors.. and as long as multiple monitors are supported, I want to move off windows completely. I really don't know whether to stay with FreeBSD across the board - or admit that Linux is a great "desktop Unix" at the absolute least. If there are any hard-core enthusiasts out there with some free time - could you sell me on an operating system so i can choose already? Thanks!

Larry the cow says, (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#5925295)

_____________
< Use Gentoo! >
-------------
\ ^__^
\ (oo)\_______
(__)\ )\/\
||----w |
|| ||

Beacuse, Gentoo is fast, free and actually upto date. No more XFree86 4.1, No more KDE 2.2, No more kernel 2.2 and no more Religous flamewars! Join the <a href="http://www.gentoo.org">larry the cow fan club today!</a>

They dumped i486 (1)

Pelam (41604) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925327)

While debian is agonizing about leaving i386 behind.
For me the biggest plus of Libranet over Debian would be that binaries are optimized for current generation of pc:s.

49$ seems pretty steep for one version.
While the software is the latest crop today it may not be so after a few months.

Do I need to pay again then?

Domain name? (-1, Troll)

CausticWindow (632215) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925335)

The Linux community aren't exactly top of the pops in the corporate world, much in fact due to their rather immature birdlike mascot.

A smart move from the core developers, would be to adopt the Debian logo as the official Linux logo. It's both smart and well designed. At the same time, Debian is easily recognised by professionals to be the best distro of Linux. This would only be the start of a brand new image for Linux and the community as a whole.

Considering this, and the recent problems Linux have had with corporate penetration, I can't see why domain names like Mad Penguin are chosen. The only effect is to drive away potential serious customers.

Re:Domain name? (4, Insightful)

FrostedWheat (172733) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925415)

The Linux community aren't exactly top of the pops in the corporate world, much in fact due to their rather immature birdlike mascot.

Immature? Rubbish. It reflects what the linux developers are doing perfectly. Not trying to be corporate, not trying to be 'top of the pops'. Simply making cool stuff because they enjoy doing it. It's upto the various distros to present that processional 'corporate' face. And they are doing it just fine thank you very much. :)

Considering this, and the recent problems Linux have had with corporate penetration, I can't see why domain names like Mad Penguin are chosen.

Maybe because the owner of the domain liked the name? *shrug*

The only effect is to drive away potential serious customers.

Again, this is a distro specific thing. Redhat and Debian both are very well presented. Presentation is not the problem, not by a long shot.

Re:Domain name? (5, Insightful)

LMCBoy (185365) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925467)

You seem to be suffering from the misconception that Linux is some kind of business "product" which must be "marketed" to "customers". Please disabuse yourself of this notion. Linus chose the fat penguin logo because it was cute and funny. He doesn't give a dang if it makes the project seem less "professional", and neither do most of the rest of us penguinistas.

If some company (redhat, lindows, libranet, suse) wants to package and sell the work of the community to their customers, then the marketing of Linux is their problem; don't try to foist it off on us, because we could not care less.

In short, Linux is not a business! So don't expect us to behave like businesspeople.

Install Knoppix (1)

RealBeanDip (26604) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925348)

If you want an easy to install Debian distro with a boatload of software on one CD, install Knoppix.

Why anyone would pay for this libranet distro is beyond me.

Knoppix? (2, Interesting)

Cthefuture (665326) | more than 10 years ago | (#5925624)

Uh, Knoppix [knoppix.org] has had that latest stuff (KDE 3.1, new kernel, etc.) for some time now.

In case you didn't know, Knoppix is Debian based and has some awesome hardware auto-detection utilities.
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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...