 DistroWatch Weekly |
| Tip Jar |
If you've enjoyed this week's issue of DistroWatch Weekly, please consider sending us a tip.
(Tips this week: 0, value: US$0.00) |
|
|
|
 bc1qxes3k2wq3uqzr074tkwwjmwfe63z70gwzfu4lx  lnurl1dp68gurn8ghj7ampd3kx2ar0veekzar0wd5xjtnrdakj7tnhv4kxctttdehhwm30d3h82unvwqhhxarpw3jkc7tzw4ex6cfexyfua2nr  86fA3qPTeQtNb2k1vLwEQaAp3XxkvvvXt69gSG5LGunXXikK9koPWZaRQgfFPBPWhMgXjPjccy9LA9xRFchPWQAnPvxh5Le paypal.me/distrowatchweekly • patreon.com/distrowatch |
|
| Extended Lifecycle Support by TuxCare |
|
|
| Reader Comments • Jump to last comment |
1 • RE: Categories and RedHat/Fedora Split (by Honaby at 2003-11-10 15:02:49 GMT)
May I suggest that the categories includes the focus on the features of the distributions like Multimedia support, Hardware support, Desktop focus, etc. Aside from the usual CD/LIVE based, source-based, firewall, etc.
The categories can also include Graphical Boot screen, Graphical Install, Etc... this way, new users can easily choose between distributions that they need.
About the Fedora/RedHat split, I second the motion! RedHat clearly states that they do not support the Fedora Project.
Fedora is a trademark of Red Hat, Inc.
The Fedora Project is not a supported product of Red Hat, Inc.
Red Hat, Inc. is not responsible for the content of other sites.
The split is definitely a must!!! The problem is how do you split the page hit ranking for RedHat and Fedora?
2 • fedora/redhat split (by dennis flener at 2003-11-10 15:13:34 GMT)
I definately agree on a seperate listing for fedora. even though it has contributions from the redhat developers, it also has support from non-redhat contributors. redhat and fedora are as seperate as say, knoppix and gnoppix. I would even rather have fedora listed instead of redhat if that were the choice.
3 • fedora vs. redhat (by Hell Fire at 2003-11-10 16:06:45 GMT)
I also agree that Fedora should have its own listing... it's kinda confusing to have Fedora and RHL listed together.
- Hell Fire
4 • RedHat/Fedora Split (by sclebo05 at 2003-11-10 16:07:32 GMT)
if RedHat and Fedora are supposed to be separate entities, perhaps the best way to go is to split them. From what I understand the RedHat product is going to be a more secure and controlled product, and the Fedora a more bleeding edge collection of software. This could possibly make listing the packages for one incorrect for the other.
5 • Red Hat/Fedora split (by Elijah Newren at 2003-11-10 16:18:01 GMT)
I'll have to voice my opinion against splitting Fedora & Red Hat pages and tracking them separately. I don't see the need. Although they are vocally separating themselves and reminding people of the fact they they won't provide a business-type support (i.e. staffing a call support center), they really are running the Fedora show. Sure, more people in the community are becoming involved (I started helping some once it became a community project), it'll be some time before the outside community matches the amount of work that Red Hat is putting into the distro (if that ever happens). So, in some ways, it seems sort of like Mozilla with the Netscape engineers doing a lot of the heavy lifting with the community growing over time.
However, I do suggest a change. Instead of using "Red Hat" as the text for the link, use "Red Hat/Fedora".
Anyway, that's my $.02.
6 • Categories (by DaveW on 2003-11-10 16:33:53 GMT)
The categories that matter to me are not-rpm, live CD, and special-purpose (like DyneBolic). Not-RPM is for folks like me who are interested in any distro that offers an alternative to rpm package management. There are quite a few alternatives these days, so categorizing each type of package management could get cumbersome to the point of being uninformative.
7 • OneBase Review? (by DaveW on 2003-11-10 16:35:44 GMT)
The new OneBase sounds interesting, but solid info is hard to come by. No reviews are listed. Any chance of a review any time soon?
8 • categorising (by Erik on 2003-11-10 17:55:33 GMT)
I think it would be a good idea to split Red Hat and Fedora, since their development follow different tracks, release cycles, and Red Hat distancing themselves from Fedora.
Maybe it would be possible to categorise the distributions on different items in a database, such as:
- Type: installation / live
- Package management: rpm, apt, ...
- Freely downloadable: yes / no
-
This way people can easily search on a number of criterea, ex. I am looking for a Live CD distribution, that is freely downloadable, with apt package management.
Great site ! Good to see it evolves !!
9 • RedHat Split (by None at 2003-11-10 18:06:52 GMT)
I believe that Red Hat and Fedora should have 2 seperate listings. Fedora is supporting different packages (and versions) like xmms. Also there are different release dates between products.
To sum it up; diffent packages also different versions in addition to a different release schedual might qualify for 2 listings.
PS. Fedora is looking at the 2.6 kernel in its next relase (within 6 months), however the commercial version is looking at approx. 1 year time frame.
10 • Arch review? (by Luk van den Borne at 2003-11-10 18:10:43 GMT)
In one of the previous Distrowatch Weekly, you said you were interested in reviewing Arch Linux. Have you dropped this plan or is it still on the waiting list? I'm eager to hear what you think of Arch Linux.
Regarding the RH/Fedora split, I think Fedora should get a seperate page. There are not many differences with RH yet, but sooner or later the difference will be unacceptably large. Too large to be listed on one page.
11 • RedHat-Fedora split (by BC at 2003-11-10 19:47:45 GMT)
I can see both sides of the argument, and I think the
reasonable compromise is to delay the split until the
second release of Fedora when (presumably) there
will be a more pronounced difference between the two
in kernel/package release levels.
12 • RedHat-Fedora split (by Offer Kaye at 2003-11-10 20:27:05 GMT)
I think the decision should be consistent with current Distrowatch practices, i.e. should follow precedence. Suse Linux is a company similiar to Red Hat, and like them the have both enterprise and personal editions of their linux products.
Distowatch only covers the Suse Linux personal edition. Therefore, to remain consistent, Distrowatch should replace "redhat" with "fedora", in keeping with Red-Hat's official stance that fedora is now a seperate project. If the enterprise edition "RedHat Linux" is also covered by Distrowatch is, of course, up to Distrowatch. But I think for the personal edition the name Fedora should be adopted.
I do however agree with the last poster (BC) in that it might be a good idea to delay the name switch untill the next Fedora release- this is also in keeping with Distrowatch's policy of waiting awhile before accepting a new distribution, which if you think about it Fedora is.
13 • RedHat-Fedora split (by Julian Bane at 2003-11-10 20:49:46 GMT)
I would like to endorsethe comments of "BC" and "Offer Kaye". Having said that I think that the "Red Hat" branding has been a very positive thing for the Linux comunity, its where I started and I would hate to see it fade into obscurity on this site.
On the subject of databases I would love to be able to query this one. e.g. List distros with DEB package management, Gnome, DHCP3, Samba3. But then it is easy to wish when you don't have to implement.
14 • Red Hat Linux is discontinued (by Kent Pirkle at 2003-11-10 22:39:59 GMT)
I think the Red Hat page should be retired as an active page and kept as a historical reference. The product known as "Red Hat Linux" is gone after 9 is EOLed. There should instead be two distributions listed: Red Hat Enterprise Linux, with the different package listings for the WS and ES/AS broken out, and a Fedora Core listing for the Fedora Project. Keeping the Red Hat page for RHEL doesn't make since, you can't upgrade a RHL system to RHEL. But, you can upgrade a RHL system to Fedora Core, but Fedora Core is not Red Hat Linux.
Also, I think SUSE should have a page for their Enterprise offerings as well to be able to compare packages etc. against Red Hat.
15 • Categories (by PastorEd at 2003-11-10 23:02:21 GMT)
Hello, Distrowatch!
I just wanted to give my thoughts on the categorization process.
Linux is a VERY configurable OS. Almost to the point of overkill. I would suggest, to account for the variable nature of Linux distros, a MATRIX of distros based on any number of different attributes. Make the matrix searchable, and people can access the information they're interested in.
Possible groupings for this chart:
- package management;
- parent distro (Morphix is based on Knoppix, which is pased on Debian, so Debian is "parent" distro to both Knoppix and Morphix);
- targeted hardware (Peanut works well on older machines, Mandrake AMD64 won't work on your old i386)
- targeted audience (someone who wants an ultra-secure mail server isn't going to be too interested in eMovix)
- and don't forget all the major divisions you've already got: source, CD-based, etc.
Could this be done with drop down buttons, like the distro selection button on the home page?
Major Source CD-based Package Audience Parent
Distro Based (live CD) mngmnt. intended origin
Just some thoughts.
GBYLBT, PastorEd
16 • Fedora/Red Hat issue (by Elijah Newren at 2003-11-11 00:19:14 GMT)
According to http://fedora.redhat.com/about/objectives.html, Red Hat Enterprise Linux will be based on Fedora (see objective #13). So, I'd like to ask this question to those that propose Fedora & Red Hat be split into separate web pages: How do you justify keeping Debian unstable, testing, and stable under a single web page? (Remember: Although Debian unstable becomes testing and testing becomes stable, that's not really all that different from Fedora becoming RHEL). How do you justify keeping SuSE to a single page, in light of Offer Kaye's comments that SuSE has multiple offerings as well?
There may be good answers to the above questions that others can think of for this, but the only one I see is that Red Hat is trying to keep the names for their offerings more distinct than other Linux distributors.
17 • Arch review? (by ladislav at 2003-11-11 02:36:28 GMT)
I wrote a brief overview of Arch Linux for LWN:
http://lwn.net/Articles/40952/
Also, one of the readers is currently working on a review of Arch Linux, which will be published here once finished.
Reviews are hard to write. You really need to spend at least a week in the reviewed product before you can write a decent review. Unfortunately, I don't have the time - DistroWatch is a big site to run and getting bigger and more popular every day.
18 • RE: SUSE Enterprise listing (by ladislav at 2003-11-11 02:43:45 GMT)
Also, I think SUSE should have a page for their Enterprise offerings as well to be able to compare packages etc. against Red Hat.
This is easier said than done. Unlike Red Hat, SUSE does not provide the package list of their enterprise releases - unless I missed it, in which case I'd appreciate the link.
19 • what happened to the BSD's (by David Trimmer at 2003-11-11 03:14:26 GMT)
I know you focus exclusively on Linux distributions. However, I feel that as a majority of your readership are probably of the hobbyist/enthusiest crowd, I feel that the BSD's should be included. The licensing is different but FreeBSD/OpenBSD/NetBSD are probably more stable and secure than any of the Linux's. As both BSD and Linux evolved from Unix System V, I feel they should be included on your excellent site.
20 • RE: what happened to the BSD's (by ladislav at 2003-11-11 03:58:18 GMT)
This was covered before and rejected. You are wasting your time bringing up this subject again.
21 • No subject (by John Lowell on 2003-11-11 04:49:51 GMT)
Anyone familiar with the coercive updating practices instituted by Red Hat about a year ago will hardly be surprised to learn that Matthew Szulik, Red Hat's CEO, has written off Linux as a credible alternative to Windows on the desktop. What better way to focus attention on the imagined significance of one's own projects than to belittle the selection of an alternative. Gaining a meaningful impression of the character of a person or of an organizaton ordinarily would require a certain minimum of exposure up close. In the case of Szulik and Red Hat, however, one can detect the odour at a distance of parsecs.
If it weren't for the fact that it will have a continued existence as a server distro, albeit a short one one hopes, I would vote to strike Red Hat from DistroWatch's lists altogether. Given the circumstances, I vote for the two entry scheme.
John Lowell
22 • onebase 2.0 (by jxn on 2003-11-11 06:50:50 GMT)
it's nice to see onebase isn't dead in the water. perhaps I'm just an impatient fool, but I was close to giving up on it after such an expanse of time betwixt the announced and actual release dates. I'm all for taking one's time (heck, I'm a debian woody user :) ), but I wasn't seeing any updates or signs of life. Looks to be a good distro, though...worthy of an install attempt on my new laptop, methinks.
23 • Re: Fedora/Red Hat issue (by fdavid on 2003-11-11 08:56:48 GMT)
I second Elijah Newren's opinion. Just like Debian stable/unstable/testing, Gentoo stable/unstable, Mandrake releases/cooker, and so on could fit Read Hat and Fedora on the same page. This seems to me more logical. I don't find a time delay appropriate in this case, because Fedora is rather a new name than a brand new distro.
24 • RTFA -- Red Hat: Stick with Windows at home (by Eavy at 2003-11-11 09:15:31 GMT)
"I would say that for the consumer market place, Windows probably continues to be the right product line," [Matthew Szulik, chief executive of Linux vendor Red Hat,] said. "I would argue that from the device-driver standpoint and perhaps some of the other traditional functionality, for that classic consumer purchaser, it is my view that (Linux) technology needs to mature a little bit more." -- http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5101690.html
Unfortunately this very informed quote has been turned around and taken out of context by a whole lot of people. Red Hat's CEO never claimed Linux couldn't be used as a desktop OS. Fedora Core 1 is a great desktop OS. But he's honest enough to admit that home users shouldn't expect it, or any other version of Linux, to fully support the latest consumer devices (which - still - generally come with Windows drivers only). This will change, soon, but right now it would be misleading to recommend Linux as the main desktop OS to an ordinary home user (think "mom and dad"). The next step is to take over the corporate desktop, which won't require all the latest gadgets, then use that momentum to advance into the remaining consumer area.
So please read the original statement and stop spreading the misquoted FUD. (This reminds me of the spilled-coffee-lawsuit, often credited as proof how fucked-up the US justice system has become, neglecting that it actually had a lot of merit - just google for more information.)
PS: For what it's worth, I'd keep Red Hat and Fedora on the same page, at least for now. It basically is Red Hat 10 with a new name and development model. Let's hope it comes closer to Debian, my other favorite distro, this way.
25 • Separate RHEL/Fedora (by Dave on 2003-11-11 13:37:24 GMT)
IMHO, RHEL & Fedora should be separated. RHEL has a completely different objective and target audience than Fedora Core. Most users would not be willing to pay the pricey sum for RHEL. On that same note, enterprise level businesses would not be willing to consider using Fedora Core without the support of the company behind it. Therefore, they are separate distros and belong on separate pages.
Including them together would be like putting Mandrake on the same page as RH, since Mandrake was based off of RH orginally. Just because it started from RH originally does not mean it belongs on the same page. It is now a completely different distro.
David Mastny
26 • RE: Separate RHEL/Fedora (by ladislav at 2003-11-11 15:23:07 GMT)
Just because it started from RH originally does not mean it belongs on the same page. It is now a completely different distro.
Have you actually installed Fedora Core 1? I have serious doubts, otherwise you would not claim that Fedora is a completely different distro.
In fact, Fedora is nothing but a re-branded Red Hat Linux, made by the same developers as Red Hat Linux, using the same Red Hat configuration tools, the same Red Hat Networks infrastructure, the same Red Hat kernel patches... I honestly don't see how you can claim that Fedora is completly different. It is not. Install it and see for yourself.
27 • No subject (by John Lowell on 2003-11-11 17:34:18 GMT)
Facinating that Eavy would think that it's the world's responsibility to interpret Matthew Szulik properly and not Szulik's to make himself clear. I think he made himself entirely clear, Eavy:
"I would say that for the consumer market place, Windows probably continues to be the right product line," [Matthew Szulik, chief executive of Linux vendor Red Hat,] said. "I would argue that from the device-driver standpoint and perhaps some of the other traditional functionality, for that classic consumer purchaser, it is my view that (Linux) technology needs to mature a little bit more."
If they are meant, where are the distinctions in that statement? Given the centerpiece of Red Hat's business plan - in corporatese "the enterprise" mentioned so frequently by this clown - why would anyone assume that he had any distinctions in mind at all? I don't think he had any hairs to split here, Eavy, and neither do lots of others, so spare those of us that can read the assertions of misrepresenting him, will you. I mean what part of "the right product line" don't you understand?
John Lowell
28 • Categories (by PastorEd at 2003-11-11 20:39:32 GMT)
Hello, Distrowatch!
I just wanted to give my thoughts on the categorization process.
Linux is a VERY configurable OS. Almost to the point of overkill. I would suggest, to account for the variable nature of Linux distros, a MATRIX of distros based on any number of different attributes. Make the matrix searchable, and people can access the information they're interested in.
Possible groupings for this chart:
- package management;
- parent distro (Morphix is based on Knoppix, which is pased on Debian, so Debian is "parent" distro to both Knoppix and Morphix);
- targeted hardware (Peanut works well on older machines, Mandrake AMD64 won't work on your old i386)
- targeted audience (someone who wants an ultra-secure mail server isn't going to be too interested in eMovix)
- and don't forget all the major divisions you've already got: source, CD-based, etc.
Could this be done with drop down buttons, like the distro selection button on the home page?
Major Source CD-based Package Audience Parent
Distro Based (live CD) mngmnt. intended origin
Just some thoughts.
GBYLBT, PastorEd
29 • RHL/Fedor (by Gary on 2003-11-12 00:53:51 GMT)
I think they should be split but I'm not sure as to when or possibly to what extent. Right now they are one in the same as ladislav noted above. I upgraded RH9 to FC1. The only difference being some Fedora splash screens etc. All of Red Hats tools are still in this release (redhat-config-network, redhat-config-mouse, etc.). I guess one has to think about exactly what makes a distribution a distribution. I think that only time will tell; when we see how far Redhat will distance themselves from Fedora. But like noted above, it's really no different than any other distro 'fork' or 'spin-off' if you will. Right now it seems like they are the same (other then some Fedora stuff I guess they are) but they are indeed separate which will become more evident in the future (or not). Fedora's name, Fedora's work, Fedora's distro. People will continue to contribute including RH engineers and programmers. But how long will RH continue and how much? It's really the community that does all the hard work. Let's not forget that there are other distros based on RedHat. Perhaps I just don't understand what makes Fedora any more special than the others...
I also wonder if the tools mentioned above will change names i.e. redhat-config-network -> fedora-config-network. It really doesn't matter... they contribute too and are entitled to use their RedHat name. IMO if all, or the majority of all the work, is done outside of RedHat then it should be considered a separate distribution regardless of Redhat's contributions. I think the twist here is that, in the future, instead of Fedora being based on RedHat, Redhat will be based on Fedora...
Just my opinion.
30 • Fedora (by David Mastny on 2003-11-13 13:44:59 GMT)
Ladislav,
You do bring up a good point. Admittedly, I have not yet had the pleasure of installing FC1. Perhaps it is not very different yet, but I was assuming that at some point it may be quite different.
Perhaps at this point in the game, we could ride both sides of the fence. In other words, we could keep FC1 listed in *both* the RH section as well as creating a separate page for Fedora. That way, those who didn't know better and were searching for fedora would be able to find it on its own page, while those upgrading from RH would still see FC1 as the next "upgrade."
David Mastny
31 • Split (by Leo on 2003-11-13 15:18:32 GMT)
How about waiting a little and see ? I would split them the moment they start diverging in reality (i.e. using different packages, etc.). If the package list can be maintained consistently for RedHat/Fedora as a whole, then why not keep them as an entity ?
If no important branching occurs, Fedora will end up being for RedHat what cooker is for Mandrake, and cooker is nicely listed within the Mandrake entry ...
32 • RedHat (Szulik) pissing itself (by Leo on 2003-11-13 15:28:39 GMT)
I find Szulik's comments obnoxious. And it is not the first time we hear people from RedHat saying something along these lines. And that was a big factor for me to switch to Mandrake at the time. Look, it is ok if RedHat concludes that home consumer market is not profitable for them and they exit retail market. But this does not imply that Linux is not ready for the Desktop. It is quite ready. RedHat Linux is not ready perhaps, I found my Mandrake desktop much more user friendly, polished, and working out of the box.
What he doesn't realize, is that this irresponsible advertising from a Linux visible head to TheMonopoly is just going in the wrong direction: more power to the monopoly. The only aspect where Linux lags is driver/third party software support. And this is because of the huge dominance of the Monopoly on the consumer market. The same market Szulik is giving up. What a load of crap !
33 • Linux on the Destop (by JeffreyB on 2003-11-13 19:52:06 GMT)
As much as I hate to admit it... IMHO- Linux is NOT ready for primetime use in most new desktop user home settings - unless the home user only wants to surf the net, get email, and do the typical "office" stuff with OpenOffice. I believe that if Linux is introduced to "Joe" home user too soon and he has a bad experience, then he will tell his friends that Linix is a piece of #$%@... The word will spread and thats what M$ would like to see happen. Better to wait until the drivers and applications get more mature and for a user support base get in place.
34 • No subject (by John Lowell on 2003-11-13 20:52:30 GMT)
Hi JeffreyB,
Do work for Red Hat by any chance? :-)
John Lowell
35 • Comments (by Michelle at 2004-06-27 14:03:31 GMT)
It stunk!!! So BORING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Number of Comments: 35
Display mode: DWW Only • Comments Only • Both DWW and Comments
| | |
| TUXEDO |
TUXEDO Computers - Linux Hardware in a tailor made suite
Choose from a wide range of laptops and PCs in various sizes and shapes at TUXEDOComputers.com. Every machine comes pre-installed and ready-to-run with Linux. Full 24 months of warranty and lifetime support included!
Learn more about our full service package and all benefits from buying at TUXEDO.
|
| Archives |
| • Issue 1100 (2024-12-09): Oreon 9.3, differences in speed, IPFire's new appliance, Fedora Asahi Remix gets new video drivers, openSUSE Leap Micro updated, Redox OS running Redox OS |
| • Issue 1099 (2024-12-02): AnduinOS 1.0.1, measuring RAM usage, SUSE continues rebranding efforts, UBports prepares for next major version, Murena offering non-NFC phone |
| • Issue 1098 (2024-11-25): Linux Lite 7.2, backing up specific folders, Murena and Fairphone partner in fair trade deal, Arch installer gets new text interface, Ubuntu security tool patched |
| • Issue 1097 (2024-11-18): Chimera Linux vs Chimera OS, choosing between AlmaLinux and Debian, Fedora elevates KDE spin to an edition, Fedora previews new installer, KDE testing its own distro, Qubes-style isolation coming to FreeBSD |
| • Issue 1096 (2024-11-11): Bazzite 40, Playtron OS Alpha 1, Tucana Linux 3.1, detecting Screen sessions, Redox imports COSMIC software centre, FreeBSD booting on the PinePhone Pro, LXQt supports Wayland window managers |
| • Issue 1095 (2024-11-04): Fedora 41 Kinoite, transferring applications between computers, openSUSE Tumbleweed receives multiple upgrades, Ubuntu testing compiler optimizations, Mint partners with Framework |
| • Issue 1094 (2024-10-28): DebLight OS 1, backing up crontab, AlmaLinux introduces Litten branch, openSUSE unveils refreshed look, Ubuntu turns 20
| | • Issue 1093 (2024-10-21): Kubuntu 24.10, atomic vs immutable distributions, Debian upgrading Perl packages, UBports adding VoLTE support, Android to gain native GNU/Linux application support |
| • Issue 1092 (2024-10-14): FunOS 24.04.1, a home directory inside a file, work starts of openSUSE Leap 16.0, improvements in Haiku, KDE neon upgrades its base |
| • Issue 1091 (2024-10-07): Redox OS 0.9.0, Unified package management vs universal package formats, Redox begins RISC-V port, Mint polishes interface, Qubes certifies new laptop |
| • Issue 1090 (2024-09-30): Rhino Linux 2024.2, commercial distros with alternative desktops, Valve seeks to improve Wayland performance, HardenedBSD parterns with Protectli, Tails merges with Tor Project, Quantum Leap partners with the FreeBSD Foundation |
| • Issue 1089 (2024-09-23): Expirion 6.0, openKylin 2.0, managing configuration files, the future of Linux development, fixing bugs in Haiku, Slackware packages dracut |
| • Issue 1088 (2024-09-16): PorteuX 1.6, migrating from Windows 10 to which Linux distro, making NetBSD immutable, AlmaLinux offers hardware certification, Mint updates old APT tools |
| • Issue 1087 (2024-09-09): COSMIC desktop, running cron jobs at variable times, UBports highlights new apps, HardenedBSD offers work around for FreeBSD change, Debian considers how to cull old packages, systemd ported to musl |
| • Issue 1086 (2024-09-02): Vanilla OS 2, command line tips for simple tasks, FreeBSD receives investment from STF, openSUSE Tumbleweed update can break network connections, Debian refreshes media |
| • Issue 1085 (2024-08-26): Nobara 40, OpenMandriva 24.07 "ROME", distros which include source code, FreeBSD publishes quarterly report, Microsoft updates breaks Linux in dual-boot environments |
| • Issue 1084 (2024-08-19): Liya 2.0, dual boot with encryption, Haiku introduces performance improvements, Gentoo dropping IA-64, Redcore merges major upgrade |
| • Issue 1083 (2024-08-12): TrueNAS 24.04.2 "SCALE", Linux distros for smartphones, Redox OS introduces web server, PipeWire exposes battery drain on Linux, Canonical updates kernel version policy |
| • Issue 1082 (2024-08-05): Linux Mint 22, taking snapshots of UFS on FreeBSD, openSUSE updates Tumbleweed and Aeon, Debian creates Tiny QA Tasks, Manjaro testing immutable images |
| • Issue 1081 (2024-07-29): SysLinuxOS 12.4, OpenBSD gain hardware acceleration, Slackware changes kernel naming, Mint publishes upgrade instructions |
| • Issue 1080 (2024-07-22): Running GNU/Linux on Android with Andronix, protecting network services, Solus dropping AppArmor and Snap, openSUSE Aeon Desktop gaining full disk encryption, SUSE asks openSUSE to change its branding |
| • Issue 1079 (2024-07-15): Ubuntu Core 24, hiding files on Linux, Fedora dropping X11 packages on Workstation, Red Hat phasing out GRUB, new OpenSSH vulnerability, FreeBSD speeds up release cycle, UBports testing new first-run wizard |
| • Issue 1078 (2024-07-08): Changing init software, server machines running desktop environments, OpenSSH vulnerability patched, Peppermint launches new edition, HardenedBSD updates ports |
| • Issue 1077 (2024-07-01): The Unity and Lomiri interfaces, different distros for different tasks, Ubuntu plans to run Wayland on NVIDIA cards, openSUSE updates Leap Micro, Debian releases refreshed media, UBports gaining contact synchronisation, FreeDOS celebrates its 30th anniversary |
| • Issue 1076 (2024-06-24): openSUSE 15.6, what makes Linux unique, SUSE Liberty Linux to support CentOS Linux 7, SLE receives 19 years of support, openSUSE testing Leap Micro edition |
| • Issue 1075 (2024-06-17): Redox OS, X11 and Wayland on the BSDs, AlmaLinux releases Pi build, Canonical announces RISC-V laptop with Ubuntu, key changes in systemd |
| • Issue 1074 (2024-06-10): Endless OS 6.0.0, distros with init diversity, Mint to filter unverified Flatpaks, Debian adds systemd-boot options, Redox adopts COSMIC desktop, OpenSSH gains new security features |
| • Issue 1073 (2024-06-03): LXQt 2.0.0, an overview of Linux desktop environments, Canonical partners with Milk-V, openSUSE introduces new features in Aeon Desktop, Fedora mirrors see rise in traffic, Wayland adds OpenBSD support |
| • Issue 1072 (2024-05-27): Manjaro 24.0, comparing init software, OpenBSD ports Plasma 6, Arch community debates mirror requirements, ThinOS to upgrade its FreeBSD core |
| • Issue 1071 (2024-05-20): Archcraft 2024.04.06, common command line mistakes, ReactOS imports WINE improvements, Haiku makes adjusting themes easier, NetBSD takes a stand against code generated by chatbots |
| • Issue 1070 (2024-05-13): Damn Small Linux 2024, hiding kernel messages during boot, Red Hat offers AI edition, new web browser for UBports, Fedora Asahi Remix 40 released, Qubes extends support for version 4.1 |
| • Issue 1069 (2024-05-06): Ubuntu 24.04, installing packages in alternative locations, systemd creates sudo alternative, Mint encourages XApps collaboration, FreeBSD publishes quarterly update |
| • Issue 1068 (2024-04-29): Fedora 40, transforming one distro into another, Debian elects new Project Leader, Red Hat extends support cycle, Emmabuntus adds accessibility features, Canonical's new security features |
| • Issue 1067 (2024-04-22): LocalSend for transferring files, detecting supported CPU architecure levels, new visual design for APT, Fedora and openSUSE working on reproducible builds, LXQt released, AlmaLinux re-adds hardware support |
| • Issue 1066 (2024-04-15): Fun projects to do with the Raspberry Pi and PinePhone, installing new software on fixed-release distributions, improving GNOME Terminal performance, Mint testing new repository mirrors, Gentoo becomes a Software In the Public Interest project |
| • Issue 1065 (2024-04-08): Dr.Parted Live 24.03, answering questions about the xz exploit, Linux Mint to ship HWE kernel, AlmaLinux patches flaw ahead of upstream Red Hat, Calculate changes release model |
| • Issue 1064 (2024-04-01): NixOS 23.11, the status of Hurd, liblzma compromised upstream, FreeBSD Foundation focuses on improving wireless networking, Ubuntu Pro offers 12 years of support |
| • Issue 1063 (2024-03-25): Redcore Linux 2401, how slowly can a rolling release update, Debian starts new Project Leader election, Red Hat creating new NVIDIA driver, Snap store hit with more malware |
| • Issue 1062 (2024-03-18): KDE neon 20240304, changing file permissions, Canonical turns 20, Pop!_OS creates new software centre, openSUSE packages Plasma 6 |
| • Issue 1061 (2024-03-11): Using a PinePhone as a workstation, restarting background services on a schedule, NixBSD ports Nix to FreeBSD, Fedora packaging COSMIC, postmarketOS to adopt systemd, Linux Mint replacing HexChat |
| • Issue 1060 (2024-03-04): AV Linux MX-23.1, bootstrapping a network connection, key OpenBSD features, Qubes certifies new hardware, LXQt and Plasma migrate to Qt 6 |
| • Issue 1059 (2024-02-26): Warp Terminal, navigating manual pages, malware found in the Snap store, Red Hat considering CPU requirement update, UBports organizes ongoing work |
| • Issue 1058 (2024-02-19): Drauger OS 7.6, how much disk space to allocate, System76 prepares to launch COSMIC desktop, UBports changes its version scheme, TrueNAS to offer faster deduplication |
| • Issue 1057 (2024-02-12): Adelie Linux 1.0 Beta, rolling release vs fixed for a smoother experience, Debian working on 2038 bug, elementary OS to split applications from base system updates, Fedora announces Atomic Desktops |
| • Issue 1056 (2024-02-05): wattOS R13, the various write speeds of ISO writing tools, DSL returns, Mint faces Wayland challenges, HardenedBSD blocks foreign USB devices, Gentoo publishes new repository, Linux distros patch glibc flaw |
| • Issue 1055 (2024-01-29): CNIX OS 231204, distributions patching packages the most, Gentoo team presents ongoing work, UBports introduces connectivity and battery improvements, interview with Haiku developer |
| • Issue 1054 (2024-01-22): Solus 4.5, comparing dd and cp when writing ISO files, openSUSE plans new major Leap version, XeroLinux shutting down, HardenedBSD changes its build schedule |
| • Issue 1053 (2024-01-15): Linux AI voice assistants, some distributions running hotter than others, UBports talks about coming changes, Qubes certifies StarBook laptops, Asahi Linux improves energy savings |
| • Issue 1052 (2024-01-08): OpenMandriva Lx 5.0, keeping shell commands running when theterminal closes, Mint upgrades Edge kernel, Vanilla OS plans big changes, Canonical working to make Snap more cross-platform |
| • Issue 1051 (2024-01-01): Favourite distros of 2023, reloading shell settings, Asahi Linux releases Fedora remix, Gentoo offers binary packages, openSUSE provides full disk encryption |
| • Issue 1050 (2023-12-18): rlxos 2023.11, renaming files and opening terminal windows in specific directories, TrueNAS publishes ZFS fixes, Debian publishes delayed install media, Haiku polishes desktop experience |
| • Issue 1049 (2023-12-11): Lernstick 12, alternatives to WINE, openSUSE updates its branding, Mint unveils new features, Lubuntu team plans for 24.04 |
| • Issue 1048 (2023-12-04): openSUSE MicroOS, the transition from X11 to Wayland, Red Hat phasing out X11 packages, UBports making mobile development easier |
| • Issue 1047 (2023-11-27): GhostBSD 23.10.1, Why Linux uses swap when memory is free, Ubuntu Budgie may benefit from Wayland work in Xfce, early issues with FreeBSD 14.0 |
| • Issue 1046 (2023-11-20): Slackel 7.7 "Openbox", restricting CPU usage, Haiku improves font handling and software centre performance, Canonical launches MicroCloud |
| • Full list of all issues |
| Star Labs |
Star Labs - Laptops built for Linux.
View our range including the highly anticipated StarFighter. Available with coreboot open-source firmware and a choice of Ubuntu, elementary, Manjaro and more. Visit Star Labs for information, to buy and get support.
|
| Random Distribution | 
Ophcrack LiveCD
Ophcrack LiveCD was a specialist SliTaz-based live CD containing Ophcrack, an open source Windows password cracker that uses rainbow tables. The graphical program included on the live CD was reputed for being able to crack alphanumeric Windows passwords of up to 14 characters in usually just a few seconds.
Status: Discontinued
|
| TUXEDO |
TUXEDO Computers - Linux Hardware in a tailor made suite
Choose from a wide range of laptops and PCs in various sizes and shapes at TUXEDOComputers.com. Every machine comes pre-installed and ready-to-run with Linux. Full 24 months of warranty and lifetime support included!
Learn more about our full service package and all benefits from buying at TUXEDO.
|
| Star Labs |
Star Labs - Laptops built for Linux.
View our range including the highly anticipated StarFighter. Available with coreboot open-source firmware and a choice of Ubuntu, elementary, Manjaro and more. Visit Star Labs for information, to buy and get support.
|
|
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
