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!

New debian-mentors Public .deb Repository Available

timothy posted more than 11 years ago | from the chicken-and-egg-resolved dept.

Debian 33

JohnKFisher writes "For anyone who has ever put together a .deb package, but didn't want to bother with the hassle of setting up their own repository, or trying to get your package added to the official one, the Public Package Repository is up and running. I wonder if this means someone can finally add a version of KDE not dating from late in the Carter administration."

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

KDE is current (3, Informative)

metalhed77 (250273) | more than 11 years ago | (#5994082)

If you use unstable KDE 3.1.1 is there by default. If you use stable, kde.org has a debian server up for 3.1.1 that you can use.

Re:KDE is current (3, Informative)

Phexro (9814) | more than 11 years ago | (#5994100)

Actually, the Debian KDE packages are kept quite up-to-date. I just upgraded to 3.1.2 last night. While it's not officially in woody, I've had no problems.

deb http://download.kde.org/stable/latest/Debian woody main


Add the above line to /etc/apt/sources.list and be happy.

Re:KDE is current (1)

n1k0 (553546) | more than 11 years ago | (#5994842)

Agreed, the author should keep up. I'm no fan of the Debian KDE team and have done my share of complaining when they held up 3.0 for months in the name of the gcc transition, but 3.1.2 was on its way to unstable before the KDE press release was even posted on Slashdot. I hope the author was talking about testing or stable, in which case I would urge him to re-evaluate his choice of stability over currency.

In addition, regularly updated CVS debs have been available since at least November thanks to Orth's good work. #debian-kde on Freenode will provide more information.

-Nick

Re:KDE is current (1)

n1k0 (553546) | more than 11 years ago | (#5994853)

> when they held up 3.0

Make that 3.1...

Re:KDE is current (1)

JohnKFisher (518955) | more than 11 years ago | (#5995064)

Consider me corrected, and thanks for the info. When I set up Testing (not long ago at all), it was not nearly up-to-date. I found an unofficial source for newer KDE, and just assumed that the mains were still lagging badly. Well, you know what they say... (and, hey! first accepted submission! go me!)

Re:KDE is current (1)

JohnKFisher (518955) | more than 11 years ago | (#5995141)

Though, on further look, that does require me to be on unstable, and I don't know why testing has to be so incredibly far behind (2.2!)

Re:KDE is current (4, Informative)

dzym (544085) | more than 11 years ago | (#5996488)

Testing is far behind because of the way Debian is set up.

Stable has been tested up and down and left and right, release-critical bugs must be totally eliminated, etc. The very nature of the requirements mean that stable release are relatively far and few inbetween. Once a stable release has been created, the packages that release contain are not updated except when patching bugs and security fixes. However, a stable release does provide a stable point for 3rd party packagers to create packages for.

Unstable, of course, is the up-to-the-moment bleeding-edge packages, as official packagers turn them in so to speak. This is usually very current, except for special circumstances like the cpp 2.9x to cpp 3.x transition, for which you really should be blaming the gcc people, not Debian. But since the transition is now pretty much over, Unstable is back on track with the fast updates.

Testing, however, is the middle ground. Nobody builds packages for testing, because testing is where packages from Unstable filter down to, unless blocked by breakage that would otherwise have been solved in Unstable, but for which packages have not yet filtered down into Testing. This includes security fixes: they go into either stable, or unstable ... not testing. Most people should use either Stable or Unstable. Testing is not a good place to be.

Re:KDE is current (1)

Debian Troll (676582) | more than 11 years ago | (#6055461)

Testing is far behind because of the way Debian is set up. Correct. All the Debian developers are talent-free filthy stinking cocksucking GNU-hippies. There is precious little time between apt-getting fucked in the ass by your Debian-using buddies to actually maintain and test packages. Thankyou

Re:KDE is current (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5997226)

ya, kde may be current. but where the hell is XFree86 4.3.0? Nowhere to be found..that's where..after googleing for 30 minutes, i found some debs for stable...but not for unstable...i thought unstable was a *bit* more like other distros in terms of being upto date.. in closing all i iwant is my Alphablended (red) Cursor dag nabbit!

Where do we vote? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5994095)

and who is responsible for the boot floppies ?

--
`apt vote yes`

that's nice! (-1, Troll)

Tuxinatorium (463682) | more than 11 years ago | (#5994137)

But when will we see a beowulf cluster of Cowboyneals?

VERY useful (2, Interesting)

Taral (16888) | more than 11 years ago | (#5994162)

This is a nice way of hosting packages when someone doesn't have the space to put up their own apt-repository. If it's searchable, that's a bonus.

It remains to be seen exactly what kinds of packages will end up here. At least it still requires a DD sponsor, so hopefully poorly-packaged/broken packages will not end up here...

Re:VERY useful (1)

cakoose (460295) | more than 11 years ago | (#6012861)

Where on the site did it say that a packager requires a sponsor? From the "About" page, it seems like they're warning you that the packages might be poorly-packaged/broken.

Do all Deb/Gentoo users have such bad attitudes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5994175)

Sorry if the subject sounds like flamebait, but I am getting so tired of all the RedHat bashing being done by Debian/Gentoo users, especially on slashdot! So, to all you Debian/Gentoo users out there, can you please explain to me why you go around spreading FUD about RedHat? Is it because RedHat is a commercial company? Are there real technical issues that make RedHat the piece of shit that you all claim it is? Or is it because Gentoo and Debian just happen to attract a lot of these vocal assholes?

I have used both RedHat and Debian and from a user standpoint, they are basically the same, like they should be since they both share 99% of the same software. I am sure from an administrators point of view there are probably some differences, but here I only have experience with RedHat. In this area, I have never had any problems figuring out RedHat's system of configuration files in /etc. So what is the big problem with RedHat?

I have even seen comments from Debian users who claim to have little or no respect for RedHat users? Why are they such assholes? I have never seen a RedHat user bash a Debian user like this? All these negative comments do nothing but decrease my respect for Debian and it's users. If you like one system over another then use it, I don't give a shit. Why do you have to put others down just because they are using the other system? Grow up people! It is all Linux!

Re:Do all Deb/Gentoo users have such bad attitudes (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5994322)

debian users are deluded. i should i know. i am/was one. (i run gentoo on my main boxes; with debian still on my public server)

debian's great leap over redhat that is the largest cause for criticism is a good packaging system with proper dependancies and *the ability to resolve dependancies automatically*. gentoo fixes debian's problems by not being license nazis and by offering the latest software soon after release optimized for your system.

Redhat lacks a central package repository and the ability to work out what things depend on what so that you can actually install something without manually hunting for more rpms or just saying screw it and installing everything.

that said, why does such a packaging system matter for most people? it doesn't. redhat can be managed site wide by simply deploying security/bugfix rpms and nothing else new beyond what your site has defined as the base install. when it comes time to upgrade a full distro/machine upgrade is done to a much later redhat release. for the other lusers out there that happily reinstall their system with each redhat release it also doesn't matter.

Re:Do all Deb/Gentoo users have such bad attitudes (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 10 years ago | (#6032216)

Actually, if you're not just rolling out cookie cutter desktops fro everyone, solid package management (in particular dependancy resolution) is very important. Web server? base+apache+perl (depending on need, add mysql or postgres), no worries, it WILL just work. periodicly, do apt-get update; apt-get upgrade (to be fair, RedHat is catching up there with up2date, but Debian's had that for many years). New version comes out? apt-get update ; apt-get dist-upgrade, it will just work.

While home users won't find that so compelling, they will like it when they download a packaged binary from elsewhere and just wants to get it installed.

At the same time, for the packages themselves, I actually find RPM easier to maintain (as a developer). Thus, what I'm really waiting for is a mature apt4rpm

Re:Do all Deb/Gentoo users have such bad attitudes (0, Flamebait)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 11 years ago | (#5994337)

**Are there real technical issues that make RedHat the piece of shit that you all claim it is? Or is it because Gentoo and Debian just happen to attract a lot of these vocal assholes?**

i'm going to bite into this semi-troll(it would have more non-troll attitude if it wasn't posted anon.)

the short reason: rpm sucks.

the longer reason: rpm sucks bad, also most debian users are former red hat users who have gotten at some point annoyed how it works, and being longer time linux users have probably had to walk some redhat users through something that is easy and fast to do in debian if you know what you're doing. in users perspective they are the same, but so is windows. you click programs, they open, you type. but from admin point of view they are different, the problem is that most users have to be administrators too and debian is where admins get easy. being (maybe) former redhat users(perhaps dating with redhat several years backwards) they probably have gotten at some point very frustrated with the rpm system (while you could argue that it's fine when it works, the counter argument is that theres way too many things it doesn't do well). then theres of course flameboys, which gentoo seems to have attracted a fair bit (being the cool and hip 'performance' distro of the day), which shout things they read in a faq without understanding them (babbling how their application xyz is faster because it got compiled with zxy flags). it's all linux but the reason i try to push debian is ease of use in the long run (not the ease of first bootup and getting to x, though, with knoppix that's certainly the fastest way). i'm sure redhat has it's uses but i'm too tainted by the rpm hell i saw when i had my time using it to go back to it after trying alternative package management systems which prove that such an one-line install system _can_ work reliably.

Re:Do all Deb/Gentoo users have such bad attitudes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6030999)

Why the fuck is this modded as Flamebait?? This mod is on crack, and shouldn't be given mod points any more.

Debian: abandon ship? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5994195)

A few days ago, David Wright posted a message to the Debian-user list, questioning the wisdom of Debian's decision to target 11 architectures. He pointed out (with supporting references) that this decision has contributed to a long delay in releasing Woody; of course, other people have said this before.

The main result was that a small number of Debian insiders posted abusive comments in response to David's perfectly reasonable message. (The thread, in case you missed it, has the subject "This post is not off-topic".)

With hindsight, it's clear that trying to support too many architectures was a mistake.

Of course, everybody makes mistakes. It is truly said that he who never made a mistake, never made anything.

But what separates the doers from the wannabes is the ability to admit a mistake, change direction, and move on.

If the people in effective control of Debian's direction no longer have this ability, then perhaps Debian is no longer useful to most of us.

To save the Debian Attack Team the effort of a search, I'll admit immediately that (like most Debian users) I've contributed nothing to Debian except good intentions and trivial amounts of money. Debian does not need me. And I need a stable release with the 2.4 kernel.

Re:Debian: abandon ship? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5996285)

With hindsight, it's clear that trying to support too many architectures was a mistake.

That's no mistake, when you understand Debian's primary motivation: manifest destiny. Why eleven architectures? So that Debian can run on anything. Why does Debian have a text based installer? Because it can install on anything.

Suppose someone owns a toaster that they can't install Debian on. The problem becomes that of the Debian project to update their systems to support that machine. If Debian only had one architecture, adding more would be difficult since it would be adding shedloads of infrastructure.

Or suppose someone has a highly unusual installation, say an embedded 386 that most installers won't function on. When the user complains to the mailing list, it's the job of bootfloppies folk to make it right. Nobody wants to do their job twice, so they make certain the design is flexible from the first.

I'm disappointed by the amount of flak that the Debian developers take for their design decisions. Just because non-x86 architectures aren't important to you doesn't mean that they're not important.

Re:Debian: abandon ship? (1)

shadowpuppy (629329) | more than 11 years ago | (#5998831)

I agree whole heartedly. It makrs no sense for Debian to limit what arhitectures it supports. The number of hardware dependant packages should be quite small while the number of developers should be fairy large. Thus the cost for debian to add another achitecture should have a much smaller impact than it would on a commercial distro.

Also in the area of text based insatallers. I see no resaon the text based installer cannot be as easy to use as a graphical one. The standard install for any OS is, prep drive, install base, select and install extras. What purpose do the fancy graphics serve?

The only difference I've seen in installers has been hardware detection. It would be nice if the X server install was a bit smarter. And sometimes soundcards can be freaky.

Re:Debian: abandon ship? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5997547)

Uhhhh just on the kernel point - Woody (stable) has 2.4.18 plus patches, and you can install with 2.4 if you want (using the 2.4-bf bootfloppies / CDROM)

Al Gore invented KDE, not carter (0, Offtopic)

Splork (13498) | more than 11 years ago | (#5994263)

get it straight man.

Re:Al Gore invented KDE, not carter (0, Offtopic)

REBloomfield (550182) | more than 11 years ago | (#5996999)

well, i laughed, even if the moderator didn't.

Re:Al Gore invented KDE, not carter (1)

REBloomfield (550182) | more than 11 years ago | (#6005505)

for those without a sense of humour, or knowledge of the last ten years, Al Gore once claimed to have invented the Internet. Which is why the comment was funny. Christ...

Re:Al Gore invented KDE, not carter (1)

cakoose (460295) | more than 11 years ago | (#6013235)

For those who might propogate the urban legend presented in the parent post, I suggest reading this [salon.com] first.

Not Gentoo (3, Interesting)

RiverTonic (668897) | more than 11 years ago | (#5994476)

That's great news. Now it seems that I don't have to move to Gentoo to get some very recent packages.

FYI: This [apt-get.org] is also a good please to find your deb-packages.

We have been trolled (-1)

Bold Marauder (673130) | more than 11 years ago | (#5997020)

"I wonder if this means someone can finally add a version of KDE not dating from late in the Carter administration."
Nice try, timothy. Would have almost worked too, if it wasn't for the fact that:

A)No pdp11 on EARTH could ever run KDE
B)GNU's NOT UNIX! (and unix was all that was around during the carter years!)

You'll have to do much better than that if you're going to get one past us, Timothy.

Unstable only (1)

Plug (14127) | more than 11 years ago | (#6002200)

What we really need is a decent tested 'backports of new things to Woody' archive, for people who need a new feature, but also need mission critical stability.

Re:Unstable only (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6007827)

If you google for it you can find just about anything distributed for stable. It's just not centralised.

um... (1)

inkedmn (462994) | more than 11 years ago | (#6005253)

i run unstable and i don't really understand why anybody would want anymore bleeding-edge than that (unless they're going through "frequent-reboot" withdrawls after leaving windows...). i suppose you could add a bunch of cvs lines to sources.list and roll the dice, but gnome2.2, gcc 3.3, and galeon 1.3.4 are plenty up to date for me.

KDE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6009736)

I wonder if this means someone can finally add a version of KDE not dating from late in the Carter administration.

KDE 3.1.2 was in sid the same night I saw the announcement for it.

And, even in the 6-month (?) limbo with no KDE3 (*cough* waiting for GCC3.2 transition *cough*) in official, there were various apt repositories, including the repository on the KDE site.

But almost 6 months does seem bad ;]
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?