 DistroWatch Weekly |
| DistroWatch Weekly, Issue 159, 10 July 2006 |
Welcome to this year's 28th issue of DistroWatch Weekly! As the Debian Weekly News celebrates its five years of existence, some of our readers will be pleased to learn about a renewed effort to port the world's largest Linux distribution to the MINIX kernel. On the not so positive side, the Debian/Ubuntu world was rocked by a Debian developer's revelation that there is still much tension between the two projects. Good reviews continue to follow the recent development release of SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 10, while a new FreeBSD-based live CD project should cause some welcome excitement among the BSD geeks. In the First Looks section, we'll evaluate a commercial Linux distribution from Japan - Turbolinux 11 "Fuji" International edition. Happy reading!
Content:
 Listen to the Podcast edition of this week's DistroWatch Weekly in OGG format (5.6MB)
Listen to the Podcast edition of this week's DistroWatch Weekly in MP3 format (6.7MB)
(The Podcast edition is provided by Shawn Milo.)
 Join us at irc.freenode.net #distrowatch
|
| Miscellaneous News |
Five years of DWN, Debian GNU/MINIX, Fedora and DejaVu, TrueBSD
 As noted in last week's Debian Weekly News, the weekly newsletter of the Debian GNU/Linux developer and user community has completed five years of existence: "The DWN is a weekly online edition which informs about what is going on in the Debian community and was first published in 1999 by Joey Hess." The first issue, which was published in January 1999, has some interesting information about the start of the 2.2 kernel development series, a story about Richard Stallman's experience in installing Debian (together with a predictable complaint about the easy availability of non-free applications in the distribution), and news about the upcoming release of Debian GNU/Linux 2.1 "slink", which eventually shipped in March of that year. A nice read for the nostalgic amongst us.
* * * * *
 As widely reported on many Linux news sites, tension between Debian and Ubuntu developers continues to brew underneath the blanket of seemingly peaceful coexistence between the two projects. Explains Martin Krafft, a Debian developer and the author of the excellent The Debian System - Concept and Techniques: "In discussions with Mark Shuttleworth and other Ubuntu developers during Debconf6, I was able to spell out the main criticisms of the way Canonical/Ubuntu is handling things from the Debian perspective." The author provides details and also solutions for the main points of friction between the two projects, namely some technical issues, such as the way Ubuntu presents patches which are often incompatible with the way Debian works, and philosophical issues, e.g. jealousy between the two development groups. Worth a read if you are interested in the current state of affairs in the two distributions.
* * * * *
Some interesting news for those of you who took part in our recent discussion about MINIX in DistroWatch Weekly. According to this mailing list post, Debian's Jaldhar H. Vyas has done some initial work on porting Debian applications and utilities to the MINIX kernel: "I've done a lot of compiling of packages over the past few months, but avoided the hard parts of a full port; also my build machine has become severely limited in disk space. Next week I'm getting a replacement and at that time I'll tidy things up and hopefully start making faster progress." Called "Preventa", the author has set up an initial project page to track the port's progress. There is nothing to download yet, but at least there is intent, which will no doubt please the many MINIX fans among DistroWatch readers ;-).
* * * * *
 The Fedora project has issued a call for testing of the DejaVu font family, which is scheduled to become the default font in the new Fedora Core 6: "DejaVu is the most popular FLOSS derivative of the Bitstream Vera font family. DejaVu is currently consolidating the Vera forks initiated after it become clear Vera would not be updated or fixed any time soon (the last Vera release was done April 16, 2003). The main DejaVu aims are quality (fix all the problems of existing Vera glyphs) and coverage (extend Vera beyond its current Latin-9 limits: Cyrillic, Greek, Armenian, Arabic, etc)." DejaVu is already used as the default font in a number of major distributions. While it is certainly a beautiful font for displaying text written in the Latin alphabet, some Fedora developers are concerned that it is not yet ready to become the standard font for users of several Asian writing systems, notably Arabic, Chinese and Persian.
* * * * *
 Mad Penguin continues its series of comprehensive reviews with a thorough evaluation of SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 10: "The attention to detail is evident at every turn, right down to using the right icons for mounted devices. For instance, if you were to plug a white iPod into the system, and then plug in a black one, you will see two icons: One depicting a white iPod. One depicting a black iPod. See what I mean? ... SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 10 is a very capable, industrial strength desktop which is ready to take on basic desktop chores in the corporate environment, and for the price you simply cannot go wrong. Two thumbs up to Novell for redefining the way I look at the desktop operating system." This is another highly positive review of the latest desktop Linux product from Novell, which is turning out to be a real winner!
* * * * *
 Our recent roundup of the BSD live CDs has attracted much feedback. One of the more interesting emails we received on the subject was from Edson Brandi, FreeBSD User Group in Brazil, who pointed out a factual error in our article: "I'm the founder of FreeBSD User Group Brazil (FUG-BR). Reading your article i see that you made a little mistake - in your text about FreeSBIE you say 'FreeSBIE 1.2 - the original live CD based on FreeBSD'. This is incorrect. FUG-BR was the first group in the world to release a FreeBSD live CD; our project was born in 2001 as a rescue disk, and in 2002 we also released a set of shell scripts to make it possible for anyone to create a FreeBSD live CD. In contrast, FreeSBIE was only launched in November 2002 and was created with the help of the FUG-BR scripts." Although FUG-BR no longer develops its FreeBSD live CD, its early work was responsible for helping to launch FreeSBIE and possibly other BSD live CDs available today.
* * * * *
And while on the topic of BSD live CDs, here is some information about a new project called TrueBSD. Launched by a group of Russian developers (correction: the developers of TrueBSD seem to come from Belarus), the project's first official release, version 0.1-RC1, is based on FreeBSD 6.1 and uses XFce and Ion window managers. Besides several popular desktop applications, such as AbiWord (version 2.2.8), Firefox (1.5.0.1), Gaim (1.5.0), MPlayer (0.99.7) and Sylpheed (2.2.6), the live CD also comes with a handful of server software, including Apache (1.3.33), PHP (4.4.0) and MySQL (4.1.18). The project's web site is currently in Russian only and so is the default desktop and some of the included configuration utilities; nevertheless, those of you who can find your ways around a UNIX system will no doubt appreciate this new toy. The project's download server has severe limits on the number of simultaneous connections, but hopefully the TrueBSD developers will set up new mirror sites soon.
TrueBSD - a new live CD based on FreeBSD
(full image size: 113kB, resolution: 1280x1024 pixels)
|
| First Looks |
Turbolinux 11 International Edition
Although Turbolinux 11 "Fuji" was originally released in Japan in November last year, it wasn't until the end of May 2006 that the Japanese distribution maker announced availability of the "International" edition. The product, which sells for US$39.00 and which can be ordered from a US-based online store, is one of the few commercial distributions available today. But is it worth the asking price? And more importantly, with the large number of Linux distributions available on the Internet free of charge, is there anything in Turbolinux that makes it a product worth recommending?
The International edition of Turbolinux 11 arrived wrapped in a CD-size plastic container with three CDs and a single A4 sheet containing "Release Notes". The distribution is built on top of a slightly older kernel 2.6.13, and includes glibc 2.3.5, X.Org 6.8.2, GCC 3.4.3, KDE 3.4.2 and OpenOffice.org 2.0.2. Besides free software, the product also comes with a number of non-free applications, such as Acrobat Reader, RealPlayer and Flash Player. I installed Turbolinux 11 on a 5-year old system with Intel Pentium 4 1.4 GHz, an ASUS P4T mainboard, a Matrox Millennium G450 graphics card, 384MB or RDRAM, a Realtek 8139too network card, an on-board Intel sound card, and a 17-inch generic LCD monitor.
The installer is the venerable Mongoose, originally based on Red Hat's Anaconda, but bearing little resemblance to its more famous parent after several years of independent development. The installation starts with language configuration (English, Japanese, Simplified Chinese and Traditional Chinese are supported), then continues through the usual steps of selecting partitions, creating users, setting the root password and configuring hardware. Most of the hardware configuration is done automatically. The Turbolinux installer is excellent and does the job of getting the operating system to the hard disk with minimum of fuss, but without taking away choice.
"Fuji" offers an intuitive desktop with many of its elements and terminology borrowed from Windows XP
(full image size: 362kB, resolution: 1280x1024 pixels)
After the installation and the initial reboot I found myself looking at a standard KDE desktop with a Turbolinux wallpaper and slightly altered taskbar and menus. Especially the K menu had been simplified and some items renamed to resemble those found in Windows XP, while some of the folders (e.g. My Computer, My Documents) had also been re-branded to make Windows converts more at home. The system tray contained a networking applet and a "Turboalert" icon indicating the availability of security and bug fix updates.
For Turboalert to work, however, it was first necessary to "obtain a license". And this is where I started noticing some similarities between Turbolinux 11 and another commercial distribution released recently - Xandros Desktop 4. In both cases the product would work, but access to software updates required the extra registration step. Turbolinux's registration was more straightforward than the one thought out by Xandros, as it only required inputting the serial number found on the rub of the CD pack.
Once registered, I was able to start Turboplus - the distribution's software management program similar to Xandros Networks. Turboplus provides an intuitive way for installing and uninstalling software and plugins, as well as software updates, but unlike Xandros Networks, it does not give access to extra applications; in other words, what you get on the three CDs is all that's available; beyond that you are on your own. And although Turboplus worked as advertised, it doesn't quite compare to Xandros Networks in terms of information it provides, access to software and advanced features.
Turboplus - a utility to manage software and receive updates on Turbolinux 11
(full image size: 69kB, resolution: 832x726 pixels)
Turboplus is the only "in-house" program supplied in this edition of Turbolinux. Unlike Xandros Desktop 4, which includes a number of proprietary applications and enhancements, Turbolinux 11 is almost exclusively free and freely available software; in fact even the "Turbo Media Player" is just a re-branded edition of Kaffeine 0.7.1. And while the distribution offers support for MP3 playback and gtkpod iPod communication utility, playback of encoded DVDs is not available out of the box.
After spending a weekend investigating the latest release from Turbolinux, I couldn't help noticing a few bugs which indicated that, unlike the distribution's earlier releases, the product did not go through a very rigorous testing procedure. As an example, I installed Turbolinux three times to three different partitions, but the installer failed to configure the bootloader on all three occasions. Also, the DVD drive in /dev/hdb was incorrectly set up, so inserting any CD or DVD into the drive would fail to mount automatically (the CD-RW drive in /dev/hdd was configured correctly though). And an application crash resulted in a core dump right in my home directory - a rather unsightly stain on a distribution that was designed for non-technical users.
Despite the admittedly short time I spent putting Turbolinux 11 through its paces, I couldn't help asking myself the purpose of this commercial Linux distribution. Yes, it looks nice and is stable enough to become an operating system of choice for some users, while it is certainly very intuitive to entice new Windows-to-Linux converts. But so are other Linux distributions, many of which are free to download and use. Besides, if somebody prefers a commercial distribution with technical support, Xandros Desktop 4 seems to offer a lot more bang for the money.
There is one particular speciality of this product that some users might find useful - its support for Japanese and Chinese input. While most mainstream distributions offer the functionality, there is a difference between integrating it into the system and simply providing the tools, as those of you who have tried using the complex Asian languages on some of the main distribution can attest. Turbolinux has been a leader in support for Japanese and Chinese input on Linux and although it uses free tools to achieve this, the company's know-how and experience are still head and shoulders above most other distributions, whether free or commercial.
The "langsel" tool offers on-the-fly switch between four languages, but notice the missing Chinese character on the highlighted line.
(full image size: 69kB, resolution: 732x636 pixels)
In conclusion, the US$40 Turbolinux 11 Fuji "International" edition is a fairly decent product, especially for new Linux users and those who need good support for Chinese or Japanese input under Linux. Nevertheless, it suffers from bugs, lack of attention to detail, out-dated applications, and absence of useful enhancements that would make it worth the asking price. In the commercial distribution space it doesn't compare well with Xandros Desktop 4 on features, while even many free distributions, such as Ubuntu, SUSE or Fedora are possibly better options for the majority of Linux users.
For more information about Turbolinux 11 International edition please visit the product pages at Turbolinux.com.
|
| Released Last Week |
Gentoox 5.0
The project developing Gentoox, a Gentoo-based operating system for the Xbox, has announced a number of new releases: "New release: Gentoox Home v5.0. Summary: Gentoox Loader v6.04; updated software as of 29th July 2006; fully synced with magic as of 29th July 2006; on screen keyboard in GDM activated by hitting 'B' 5 times; KDE 3.5.2 and XFce 4.2.x; ext3 file system; junk moved out of local.start and local.stop; checkroot / checkfs bug fixed; Sparkle 2.0; ALSA and kernel ebuilds made to be more compatible with Gentoo; Linux kernel 2.4.32." Besides Gentoox Home, the project's Pro, Sparkle and Resctoox editions have all been updated; see the release announcement for more details.
StartCom Enterprise Linux 4.0.2
An updated version of StartCom Enterprise Linux has been released: "The updated release of the StartCom Enterprise Linux AS-4 series received the YUM Extender as its new package and software updater, as well as the 1.5 Firefox browser and Thunderbird mail client. This, together with additional 200 updated packages, makes this stable and proven operating system the work horse for your mission critical enterprise applications. The YUM Extender, a graphical front-end application for YUM, makes the installing, removing of software packages and updating of your system even more easy." Read the brief press release for further information.
Mini-Pentoo 2006.1
Michael Zanetta has announced the release of Mini-Pentoo 2006.1, a Gentoo-based mini live CD with the Enlightenment desktop and a selection of tools designed for penetration testing. From the changelog: "Added WiFi injection support for Madwifi-ng, Hostap, wlan-ng, rtl8180, prism54/GT; integrated portagedb so no need for the module during install; created an MPlayer module; added some Firefox extensions (Live-Http-Headers, Temper-data, ShowIP, No-Referrer); updated Nessus, Yersinia, bluediving, metasploit, nmap, kernel (2.6.16); added Kismet auto-configure script based on airmon-ng, Pentoo installer, Wifitap, tcpdump, Bluetooth stack smasher...."
Nonux 3.1
Marcel J. Zwiebel has announced the availability of a new release of Nonux, a Slackware-based desktop-oriented distribution and live CD (with Dropline GNOME as its desktop environment) designed for use in Dutch-speaking business environments. What's new in Nonux 3.1? Upgraded Linux kernel to version 2.6.17.3, upgraded GNOME to version 2.14.2, upgraded OpenOffice.org to version 2.0.3, upgraded Evolution to version 2.6.2, and upgraded Mozilla Firefox to version 1.5.0.4. Ekiga, GnuPG and Liferea have also been upgraded to newer versions. Find a complete changelog on the distribution's news page (in Dutch).
GParted LiveCD 0.2.5-3
Patrick Verner has announced the release of a new version of GParted LiveCD. What's new? "I added some goodies people have been asking for: Partimage, GRUB, rsync, fdisk, cfdisk, and sfdisk. Links has also been included to view LarryT's documentation while running the live CD and live USB. Some other stuff was upgraded like adding a shut-down menu and the entire layout of the root file system. The entire root file system is compressed with SquashFS and the boot process has been vastly changed. This saved almost 5 MB to add extras. The kernel was also updated to Linux 2.6.17.4." Here is the full release announcement with changelog.
* * * * *
Development and unannounced releases
|
| Upcoming Releases and Announcements |
|
Summary of expected upcoming releases
|
| DistroWatch.com News |
New distributions added to waiting list
- EDU-Nix. EDU-Nix is Gentoo-based live CD with KDE. The project's main goal is to provide US public schools with an open source alternative to proprietary software products.
- Shift Linux. A project by Neowin.net, Shift Linux is a new Debian/Morphix-based Linux distribution with Fluxbox and the goal of serving the (mostly) Windows user community at Neowin.net.
- TrueBSD. TrueBSD is a new general purpose live CD based on FreeBSD, using XFce and Ion window managers. The project's web site is in Russian.
* * * * *
DistroWatch database summary
* * * * *
Holiday notice
It's that time of the year when your DistroWatch maintainer takes a break from his everyday routine of reporting about new distribution releases and writing DistroWatch Weekly. Although I am not planning to touch a computer during my much needed 3-week break in South Pacific, DistroWatch will continue as normal - the news section will be maintained by Dr W T Zhu (who has been helping with the site for nearly four years), while DistroWatch Weekly will be in the hands of an experienced reviewer and Linux enthusiast - Susan Linton from Tuxmachines. See you all later!
Ladislav Bodnar
|
|
| 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 • Source Mage GNU/Linux (by harrypotter on 2006-07-10 09:37:13 GMT from Kajaani, Finland)
Source Mage's stable grimoire just got updated. Check it out if you want to try an easy-to-use and technically advanced source-based GNU/Linux distro. :-)
2 • Debian vs Ubuntu (by Eric on 2006-07-10 09:49:52 GMT from Leiden, Netherlands)
So why is this conflict put under the Ubuntu logo and not the debian?
3 • RE: 2 Debian vs Ubuntu (by ladislav on 2006-07-10 09:53:48 GMT from Taipei, Taiwan)
Just so that the first three news items on the page don't have the same logo. And to add a bit of colour to the page, of course ;-)
4 • Gnucash (by spiritraveller on 2006-07-10 11:02:45 GMT from Atlanta, United States)
Gnucash 2.0 was just released yesterday!
5 • Source Mage (by AC on 2006-07-10 11:04:01 GMT from , United States)
And don't forget, one of the few distributions (along with Debian and Gentoo) with a clear and democratic social contract, making it a true community based distribution. And they call the OS by the right name: GNU/Linux.
6 • Happy Holiday! (by Mark South on 2006-07-10 11:06:19 GMT from Altstätten, Switzerland)
Ladislav, I'm sure that I'm not the only one wishing you a pleasant and refreshing vacation, which is well-earned if your work on Distrowatch is any indication.
By the way, you say you won't be touching a computer, but do please tell us which liveCDs you'll be taking with you "just in case" :-)
7 • RE: Debian vs Ubuntu (by Béranger on 2006-07-10 11:08:43 GMT from Bucuresti, Romania)
You once were a Debian developer. But you're now a billionaire and you want to become #1 once more time. What do you do? You get some Debian developers and put them to work for you (only in theory things are eventually going back to Debian smoothly). What do you do more? You can afford to send zillions of free CDs to everyone asking for them. Which other distro maker can afford this? (Not even RedHat.)
So, why is it under the Ubuntu tag and not Debian?! What's not clear here?!
NOTE: 80-90% of the Ubuntu fans are seeing Linux for the very first time in their lives with Ubuntu. So I wouldn't put so much consideration on Ubuntu being #1... numbers don't always bring value.
8 • What about MEPIS ? (by vdb on 2006-07-10 11:45:44 GMT from Torino, Italy)
SimplyMEPIS was supposed to be released today (10/07/2006) but not only there is ono news about it on they're website but it also disappeared completely as a "upcoming release" from DistroWatch.
What happened ?
9 • RE: 8 What about MEPIS? (by ladislav on 2006-07-10 12:09:12 GMT from Taipei, Taiwan)
Today I noticed the appearance of SimplyMEPIS 6.0 RC3 on the project's main server, which means that the final release has been postponed again. I have no idea when the final will be out.
10 • Final release of Blag 50k is out ! (by Caraibes on 2006-07-10 12:14:34 GMT from Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic)
Hi Friends !
This is a last minute news : Blag 50k is out today, I haven't checked the website, but go and have a look if you want a nice distro...
see it here :
http://www.blagblagblag.org/
11 • Five years of DWN? (by Richard on 2006-07-10 12:24:57 GMT from Moncton, Canada)
If DWN was first published in January 1999, but has only been in existence for five years, where's the missing time? :)
In fact the DWN of 4th July says that Martin 'Joey' Schulze has been editing the Debian Weekly News for the last five years. The DWN itself has been going a bit longer.
12 • Turbolinux (by pollycat on 2006-07-10 12:52:34 GMT from Central District, Hong Kong)
I remember the last edition of Turbolinux came with "PowerDVD for Linux", the only distribution to carry this software and which performed almost identically to its counterpart on the Windows side and made DVD playback dead simple. It seems it is not included by default with Turbolinux 11, though information on their website suggests it is coming as a downloadable option "soon".
Turbolinux is great for asian language support and is overall very solid and polished. However, I have to agree that it offers nothing compelling compared to the other offerings available right now.
13 • Debian vs Ubuntu (by Debian User on 2006-07-10 13:44:07 GMT from Warsaw, Poland)
I'm afraid, that Debian developers will loose faith one day. What's the point of their work, when someone uses it as a big software pool, changes logo, adds few sparks and conquers the world with it? Ubuntu is pretentious, every line on their webpage is, and it shoves Debians hard work and generous philosophy straight in your face with its horrible marketing-babble.
IMHO Ubuntu should become an independent distribution. It's greatest enemy at this point is it's popularity. Ubuntu's presence EVERYWHERE may be annoying to some. Canonical: make your own distro, leave Debian alone. It won't work imho, no matter how hard you try.
14 • Jealousy? (by Jonathan on 2006-07-10 14:04:28 GMT from San Antonio, United States)
I've been aware since day one of using Ubuntu that it was based off the Debian code and used the Debian package manager. I'm wondering how much of this is jealousy on the part of Debian users that a spin-off is more popular than the original.
That being said, I do think that Ubuntu should contribute more back to the Debian project if it's going to make so much use of it.
15 • Debian and Ubuntu (by Michael on 2006-07-10 14:24:32 GMT from Nashville, United States)
Ubuntu takes much from Debian and gives back very little. So much for that "humanity to others" tripe.
16 • Re: 13, stfu plz ! (by Rohan B. Dhruva on 2006-07-10 15:00:21 GMT from Bombay, India)
The ubuntu team is not taking debian stuff and changing logos .. have you ever used ubuntu, or just speaking what other ignorant debian vs. ubuntu people like you are speaking ? Get a life, man. Debian doesnt disallow ubuntu, it never will. Atleast madduck put his opinions in a nice logical way, you just say "you suck, so get lost". What are they supposed to do ? Make a new package manager, and stop using dpkg ? Make themselves less popular ? Why dont you similarly rant for Knoppix, Kanotix, and other debian based distros? And its not like debian is going to die anyway, it will _always_ be there.
If you like the philosophy, just use debian and keep your trap shut. You are just a troll, and you just put up a flamebait there.
17 • re: message 13 (by Anonymous on 2006-07-10 15:00:35 GMT from Gretna, United States)
So much for all that talk of "software wants to be free!" Now, it's "go code your own, you big meanie!"
18 • why this critisism ? (by cb68 on 2006-07-10 15:08:31 GMT from Grenoble, France)
If ubuntu is popular : every linux user should be happy ! They contribute to popularise linux ! Linux is not ready yest for a normal user. We still need to be programmer and spend hours searching how to make it working. One thing is phylosophy but one other thing is usability ! Linux user forget often the final goal of a computer. Helping people not the opposit!
Ubuntu try to be more user friendly and more used. They have a good community / forum.
I am debian etch user but I still cannot print without rebooting to windows even with printer compatible to linux ! I am thinking about changing distribution to ubuntu...
19 • gparted looking good (by kilgoretrout at 2006-07-10 15:15:04 GMT from , United States)
If you haven't had a chance to take gparted out for a test drive, take a few minutes to download the 28MB iso and give it a try. This is a very nice free partitioning tool that is beginning to rival many commercial offerings. A lot of hard work and bug squashing went into this release and it shows. A gparted cd should be in every geek's toolbox.
20 • Debian vs Ubuntu (by Pierre on 2006-07-10 15:22:28 GMT from Boxworth, United Kingdom)
Why does everyone want Ubuntu to contribute back to Debian? Sure it's a nice and friendly thing to do, but the does the GPL oblige that? Not the way I understand it! If Debian devs can't import back patches, then they should write a backend that takes Ubuntu's source code and create patches for their system. Don't throw the problem into Ubuntu's court and play dead.
As for jealousy, it's clear even without the admission. Mark has done wonderful things for Linux and OSS, even if you think the only thing he's done is marketing. Tough, we need marketing in this day and age as technical superiority alone only guarantees failure.
21 • Sigh... (by 1c3d0g on 2006-07-10 15:48:55 GMT from Oranjestad, Aruba)
#7: are you dilusional or something?!? Let's be straight here: Debian sucks. Yeah, you heard me, it sucks. *Buntu did what Debian could never do, and that is make it easier for n00bs to control their PC, especially if they just came from Winbloze. Even some Apple developers are switching to *Buntu for God's sake! So who give's a rat's ass if Debian's userbase is shrinking etc.? Evolve or die!
22 • BSD - Well Worth a Try (by Ulysses 31 on 2006-07-10 16:03:45 GMT from Savannah, United States)
Wow! There certainly seems to be a lot happening in the world of BSD lately. There are now plenty of live CD's to choose from, as well as desktop-friendly implementations of FreeBSD; I just installed PC-BSD and was amazed at how far it has come in the last few months, and with fairly limited resources, too!
It certainly has everything most home computers users need, and configuration is a breeze.
It'll be insteresting to see if PC-BSD can maintain it's lead in terms of popularity over the equally impressive DesktopBSD project.
23 • Hmm not much substance there (by richo123 on 2006-07-10 16:13:55 GMT from , United States)
Read the blog and detected only one concrete complaint namely patch incompatibility. The rest was a catalog of apprhension and jealousy with lettle substantial backup. I think there are grounds for apprehension but it does not make for a concrete complaint. As for patch incompatibility Ubunti agreed to work on it and I would think the Debian folk should as well. This whole subject is overblown and caused by Ubuntu's popularity and Mark's commercial background. Wait and see how it develops and stop whining until you have a concrete complaint Sheesh!
24 • Debian (by Jesse on 2006-07-10 16:44:56 GMT from Calgary, Canada)
One of the few reasons I've never used Debian is because
of their (the developers) consistant fighting.... with other distros,
with each other. Their democratic approach is a nice ideal,
but it makes for inferioir software and instability.
25 • Yaaaawwwnnn (by Nobody on 2006-07-10 17:27:39 GMT from Mittelheubronn, Germany)
Yaaaawwwnnn
26 • Morphix offline? (by Poiema on 2006-07-10 17:40:12 GMT from San Francisco, United States)
Has anyone noticed that everything Morphix seems to be offline? Their site, their forums, their downloads. Does anyone know what happened? It seems odd that all should be down at once since they are on different sites and probably different servers.
27 • Vacation Time (by Digital Vampire on 2006-07-10 18:31:53 GMT from Asheville, United States)
Hope you have a great vacation!! Thanks for all the hard work you put into Distrowatch.com. You deserve it!!!
28 • Solaris VS Minix (by Rajiv Battula on 2006-07-10 19:15:41 GMT from , United States)
Hey guys, I have a question, if solaris was added to distrowatch, whats wrong with Minix being added, if one can't be listed, I say both should not be listed. Thanks
29 • Debian vs Ubuntu - ***so petty*** (by Pina Colada on 2006-07-10 20:18:19 GMT from Wellington, New Zealand)
Sigh -
This whole Debian / Ubuntu thing is just sooooo petty and ridiculous. ( Btw, I use neither distro).
Ok, I can understand the Debian devs being resentful that Ubuntu has the limelight. Big deal! Honestly - it's getting like Northern Ireland and the Catholics vs Protestants.....
If someone enjoys coding for distro "X" , then they should code, and not give a rat's a*** about what's happening in distro "Y"...
Have a nice day.... :-)
30 • Debian devs, b-o-o h-o-o (by loon on 2006-07-10 20:27:30 GMT from Durham, United States)
Why don't the Debian devs get upset with Slackware?? I mean, the first five letters explain exactly what Debian is.
31 • the debian/ubuntu thing (by butters on 2006-07-10 20:30:18 GMT from Somers, United States)
Everyone who posted above has a point. There's a problem. Both sides are aware of the problem. There's jealousy involved. There are shortcomings of the Debian project that are (intended to be) solved by Ubuntu, and Ubuntu causes some problems for Debian. Ubuntu couldn't have gotten to where it is today without Debian. Ubuntu/Canonical is a commercial distribution, so there is flashiness and self-flattery on their website. Ubuntu isn't obligated by the GPL to submit their modifications as cleanly applicable patches against whatever package version is current in Debian unstable.
With that said, it is important to note that this particular blog was posted and publicized nearly two months after the event to which it refers (Debconf 6), and significant progress has been made since then. Both sides now understand how each other's infrastructure works and what the challenges are to automating the process of "frontporting" Ubuntu's patches. From Ubuntu's prospective, they don't want to bear the entire burden of making the system work, especially since Debian refuses to use their existing (and free to use) Launchpad system. From Debian's prospective, they suppose Ubuntu has far more resources to commit to the integration work, and they view Launchpad as a slap in the face since it's proprietary.
As some noted back in the Warty days, Ubuntu is not so much a fork of Debian as it is a fork of Debian's release management system. That's something you can't just patch, not that Debian would want to anyway. This is where the conflict is rooted, and it's a rigorous test of the community aspect of the free software movement. There's nothing that compels Ubuntu to comply with Debian's requests for cooperation other than the idea that they are a part of a free software community, and that they should work together to maximize productivity. Otherwise Debian's argument holds no legal weight, and Debian has no way to prevent users from using its repositories as so-called free software "supermarkets."
32 • MINIX? (by butters on 2006-07-10 20:52:10 GMT from Somers, United States)
Oh, and about the MINIX issue... why, all of a sudden, are people clammoring for DW to include MINIX? I mean, it great for learning about OS design (that's how I learned), but as a practical system? ...and to compare it to Solaris?
I mean, Debian runs on Hurd, why isn't Hurd on DW? No love for Hurd? How about L4, or L4Linux? That's way more proven as a platform than MINIX. What about Amiga-like systems like Zeta? You surely can't leave them out, as well as Syllable and Minuet. Include those, too. While we're at it, how come were ignoring the fine ultra-mobile Linux distributions like OpenZaurus?
What does anyone stand to gain from MINIX or really any of these other highly alternative operating systems being listed on DW? Can't you find their project pages with Google? It's not like anyone's going to say, "OK, I'm finally ready to ditch Windows, but I just can't decide whether it's going to be Ubuntu or MINIX, and I wish there was a simple way to compare them."
33 • RE to #21 (by Astaroth on 2006-07-10 21:12:54 GMT from San Salvador, El Salvador)
For desktop users K/Ubuntu sucks and Debian sucks a little more!!!
For desktop please use SuSE, PCLinuxOS or Fedora. People without linux experience will thanks you is you guide them in the rigt way.
A.
34 • #33 errata (by Astaroth on 2006-07-10 21:20:34 GMT from San Salvador, El Salvador)
...will thanks you IF you guide them...
35 • (by Renald Loignon on 2006-07-10 23:07:09 GMT from Montréal, Canada)
1) As others pointed out, the communication process between Debian developers and Ubuntu developers is continuously being worked on, and the blog post that is being quoted here is two MONTHS old already, and thus somewhat old news. Read up on other blogs and forum posts that followed that one, and you will see a picture of good will emerging...
2) Note that in point 1, I did NOT refer to communications between organizations, but between individuals (developers). For these points of friction to be eliminated, good will must be continuously manifested by flesh and blood persons, and the orgs they represent will naturally follow.
3) Having tried various distros for the past few years, and long before that having briefly (and unsuccessfully) flirted wih the pre 1.0 kernel in early Slackwares, about 3 years ago I came to a decision to concentrate nearly exclusively on Debian (and derivatives), not only due to the package manager, update method and dependency resolution (though those were a big part of of the reason), but also due to the clear focus of each of their evolving sub-releases (stable, testing and unstable). Knowing what to expect, for the past 3 years I have been running a modest public-facing Email server, with a handul of paid subscribers plus a commercial client getting their mail filtered through me, and for most of that time I surfed the "bleeding edge" of sarge/testing (mostly) and etch/unstable (sometimes), and have now stabilized on sarge/stable. Only once did I encounted a ONE DAY situation where an update clobbered something (in clamav, if memory serves), and I was able to fix it myself manually and fairly quickly.
4) I requested (and received) physical copies of Ubuntu CDs on two occasions so far, and I will keep doing so. I tried them out, too, but was not too impressed (at least by the first release; still have to try out my just-arrived 6.06 LTS disks...). I would not have even CONSIDERED Ubuntu if it had not been derived from Debian! That is especially true since they originally favored Gnome, and I can't stand it. Now that Kubuntu is on nearly equal footing with the original (G)ubuntu, and BECAUSE they are a Debian derivative, I'll be happy to keep testing them some more. Hopefully, they will keep improving...
5) I recently tried to set up a server based on the server version of the latest Ubuntu, but was quite disappointed by the hoops I hads to jump through. I quickly reverted to good old sarge/stable, and was in business in little time...
(For the record, the Email address I use here is a spam trap. Go ahead guys (meaning those who harvest addresses from Web sites), keep sending me those pump-and-dump stock scams, and assorted other junk. I'll just keep using your worst to refine my spam filters... Hey, there's another one, which just scrolled by as I was typing this... ;-)
36 • Yes, it sux, but does it run in Vmware? (by Paul on 2006-07-10 23:23:20 GMT from Saint Louis, United States)
Ladislav, I'm a wool-dyed Vmware Workstation bigot. Is anyone else a virtualizer? Oh, there's probably a few. I try everything I can get my hands on using Vmware, and I notice that some distros work flawlessly (or close to it) and others "not so much." Some are dead on arrival.
Vmware Workstation runs Windows XP very well... and that's about the only way I'll run XP... but DSL is a tasty treat I use daily because it's friendly with our AIX and Solaris midranges and is smoking in Vmware Workstation.
I would enjoy a quarterly on your successes with virtualization. And I would appreciate avoiding your failures.
37 • Debian and its children (by Leon on 2006-07-10 23:45:12 GMT from Tewksbury, United States)
I have never used pure Debian except when I installed Debian through Kano's option. The combination of Debian + Klik is a joy to use and deserves much more attention.
When all is said and done I have to express my thanks to every single developer in the Open Source community and to those good developers within the commercial community who have contributed to our passion for free software. The brightest minds will migrate to Open Source because it is the future.
It's also true there are parasites who encourage the enabling of Open Source because it saves them millions of dollars in wages and hours of research. Why should they hire folks to write their software when there is a global community writing and testing software which they will eventually rebrand? But there again I'm just an end-user who has never written a line of code.
The reality is this, users like me are parasites. At least I've taken the time to say thank you.
38 • So sad.... (by bootleg on 2006-07-11 02:26:47 GMT from , United States)
This Ubuntu/Debian thing. I do use Ubuntu some.
You dont here the RPM distros fighting like you do with Debian distros. And Debian and Debian based distros is just another unstable Linux.
Makes me wana switch to RPM instead. PCLinuxOS, BLAG, and Fedora i may be heading your way.
39 • 38 (by AC on 2006-07-11 02:41:35 GMT from , United States)
"You dont here (sic) the RPM distros fighting like you do with Debian distros."
No, we never saw disputes over RHEL clones using Red Hat trademarks. (sarcasm)
The main reason one hears more about disputes involving Debian (or gentoo) is that these are true community projects, not managed by corporations and their public relations. The development process is open. If you don't like hearing about disputes, maybe you should use the software of a more closed project.
"Makes me wana switch to RPM instead."
Go for it.
40 • Minix3 missing hardware compatibility (by stolennomenclature on 2006-07-11 03:21:57 GMT from Canberra, Australia)
One thing the Minix3 project seems to be in dire need of is some kind of hardware compatibility document. I apologise to Mr Tanenbaum in advance if it is there and I have missed it, but so far have not been able to see any indications whatsoever of what kind of hardware the OS supports.
Some experience I have had trying to get it to run on my PC suggests that it supports very little modern hardware, but without a proper documentary evidence I have no real way of knowing if the support is missing or whether I have not set the system up properly.
I have to say this is the only OS I have come accross so far that did not have at least some (usually out of date) kind of list of supported hardware.
41 • 38 more on fighting (by AC on 2006-07-11 03:53:36 GMT from , United States)
It should also be noted that a lot more distros are derived from Debian that from Red Hat.
SUSE is not a Red Hat derivative, it was originally built on Slackware, but doesn't keep returning to its base. Mandrake, er Mandriva, was originally a Red Hat derivative, but again, it doesn't keep returning to the Red hat source. PCLinuxOS is based on Mandrake, but I'm not sure it still is. BLAG is based on Fedora and of all of these, it is the only one that continually bases itself on another distro.
Contrast with Debian, where four of the top 10 distros are derivatives that continually draw upon Debian's work. And there isn't the same fighting with Knoppix, DSL, or Mepis, nor with Kanotix, Xandros, or Linspire.
The only fighting is with Ubuntu. Which just happens (!) to be the number 1 distro of late and to be sponsored by a company that employs many Debian developers. There really isn't a comparable situation in RPM land.
42 • Only took a few decades . . . (by Lobster on 2006-07-11 04:04:17 GMT from Rochdale, United Kingdom)
Happy vacations to our Distrowatch Geek overlord . . .
As you are aware, Ubuntu can be the basis of Vista Ubuntu - when free for ever becomes viable. Solaris and GNUX (what sort of name is GNU/Linux?) are open source Unix. Only took a few decades . . .
What about the next decade? I will not be releasing Linux Tmxxine until 2008
meanwhile . . . http://tmxxine.com/ce/
. . . All the successful well known distros Redhat, Suse, Ubuntu (I do not mention Mandriva after they ousted the orginal duck developer - oops just did) have a marketing component. Debian will be there for those so knoppixed or inclined.
Debian is fantastic as an Ideal base.
Even little Puppy is offering a biz site
http://puppylinux.biz/
Penguin for sale, free or to rent. Answers to the name Tux. Likes fish.
43 • Netbsd (by topgun on 2006-07-11 04:33:31 GMT from , Puerto Rico)
Any news on the NetBSD roadmap ? They recently got Netbsd ported the new Xen 3 ? But....any news on future development ?.... I like Free/PC-BSD but I tend to like NetBSD more; was the first BSD I used.....
44 • Blag 50k (by Caraibes on 2006-07-11 11:47:52 GMT from Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic)
Just a follow-up on my new Blag 50k system : It rocks !
FC5 made easy !
I am thrilled with it, and recommend it to any of you looking for a distro to try (or to keep on your hdd more than just a couple of days for compulsive distro-hoppers...)
No fussing & fighting here ; )
45 • Name of the OS (by Ariszló on 2006-07-11 16:23:04 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
AC wrote: And they call the OS by the right name: GNU/Linux.
IMHO, the name of the OS is Linux. This is Webopedia's definition of an operating system:
The most important program that runs on a computer. Every general-purpose computer must have an operating system to run other programs. Operating systems perform basic tasks, such as recognizing input from the keyboard, sending output to the display screen, keeping track of files and directories on the disk, and controlling peripheral devices such as disk drives and printers.
That definition perfectly applies to Linux but not to the vast majority of GNU programs.
The so-called GNU System is neither an OS, nor a system. The majority of GNU apps are not tied to one operating system: most of them work with both Linux and the BSDs and many of them also work with Windows and the Macintosh.
Every application that runs on Windows is a Windows application and every application that runs on a Mac is a Macintosh application. Not so with GNU! Applications that run on "GNU System" are either GNU apps, or not. Check http://directory.fsf.org to see what I mean.
Links to my favorite rants:
http://www.usermode.org/docs/wordstoavoid.html
http://www.usermode.org/docs/gnulinux.html
See also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Linux_naming_controversy
46 • Please (by Synergy6 on 2006-07-11 17:57:13 GMT from London, United Kingdom)
#29 - Over 3000 people were killed in the "Big Deal!" you sarcastically reference. If you have any sense of morality or decency, please don't try to compare such a conflict to the petty squabbles of software developers.
47 • mmhh.. (by ema on 2006-07-11 19:02:51 GMT from Milano, Italy)
Firefox is installed on 7-8% of desktops around the world and Linux is probably less than this (apart servers of course..) Talking about "philosophy" ,I would care more spreading this OS more than arguing polemically about different distro or packaging tools...we can only win together! At the end everybody will install the preferred distro regardless popolarity or rewievs :-)
Since 2000 I have been using Slack and Debian and based ones, ( I had ubuntu for a couple of week on my laptop but did not turn me curious enough to keep it) end up to pclinuxos which is including apt-get & mdk admin tools. I like the fact to get best from every distro to improve the "philosophy" and see linux installed on most of computers around the world :-)
Ciaoo
48 • Arch (by tom at 2006-07-11 19:04:40 GMT from Helena, United States)
I just finished with an install and configuration of Arch Linux.
The "base" is small and very easily installed. After the base "pacman" installs all the rest. via internet.
After the install Arch needs to be configured. This is the best referance I have found:
http://wael.nasreddine.com/Articles/Articles/Install_Arch_Linux.html
It took a few hours, but now that it is done Arch is fast and up to date.
The forums are very helpful.
49 • GNU/Linux (by AC on 2006-07-11 21:27:17 GMT from , United States)
First, it should be noted that in saying "the right name", I was being partially facetious. I recognize the alternative usage of course. I happen to prefer "GNU/Linux" for two reasons. First, it acknowledges the roles of the GNU Project in not only creating the software we all use, but in starting the move toward a completely Free Unix system. Second, the Linux kernel by itself does not and could not consitiute a Unix system, according to the Single Unix Specification.
But yes, it's possible to call a kernel by itself an "operating system" and that does conform to some uses of the phrase.
The Alexis de Tocqueville Foundation played much on this ambiguity by emphasizing how implausible it would be that a single teenager wrote the entire operating system without plagiarizing - implausible because most people think of operating systems as things like Windows, where there was some dispute whether a web browser was part of the system, and to think Linux wrote glibc, bash, the core utilities, et al, let along X and it's friends does stretch all credibility.
50 • Name vs. acknowledgement (by Ariszló on 2006-07-11 22:48:40 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
Every textbook on Linux acknowledges GNU's initiative but why stuff the acknowledgment into the name? It has been repeatedly argued that one could also acknowledge X, Mozilla, OpenOffice.org and many other non-GNU projects that most users are familiar with. You cannot enumerate all the valuable contributions in a name. The name of Planet Earth is simply Earth, not Earth/Air/Water/etc. Pars pro toto makes a much better name than an incomplete list.
Linux is short and easy to pronounce, unlike Guh-NOO Slash Linux, which is both a tongue-twister and too long.
What I have never understood is this. If what they call "GNU/Linux" is the "GNU System" using the Linux kernel then how is it possible that most packages designed for the GNU System are not "GNU packages"? What makes a GNU package? It is not enough to be designed for the GNU System and it is not enough to be GPL'd either. Is GNU the whole system or just a closed subset of it?
All this rant might imply that I don't like the FSF, which is wrong. Linux would not be what it is now without GNU (and GNU would be less known without Linux, too). What I don't like is GNUSpeak.
51 • 50 (by AC on 2006-07-12 01:15:33 GMT from , United States)
First of all, if you read what I wrote, I referred not only to acknowledging the GNU software (as we should also acknowledge Apache, MySQL, Perl, X, et al) but the GNU project's distinctive role in making a free Unix system possible, getting the ball rolling.
Second, I referred to what constitutes a Unix system. You don't need Mozilla or Apache to make a recognizably Unix-like operating system. You do need C libraries and core utilities.
I'm not saying that you can't call it "Linux". You're entitled to your preference. And I am entitled to appreciate that Debian and Source Mage say "GNU/Linux" and those projects are entitled to call it that.
52 • Blag Linux And GNU 5000 (by Carl Smuck on 2006-07-12 01:21:58 GMT from Haymarket, United States)
Blag Linux is a very small but good linux distribution. I took a Fedora 5 DVD I have and added KDE and some other programs to Blag. To the guy who wants the russian webpage for true bsd translated there is a language translator program and it is great. Here is the translation of the True BSD page. http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=ru_en&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftruebsd.ispvds.com%2F
53 • Linux vs. GNU/Linux (by rglk on 2006-07-12 02:14:41 GMT from Edgewater, United States)
My reading of the common usage of these terms is as follows. In the strict sense of the term, Linux refers only to the kernel and perhaps the most essential system utilities. When someone builds a distribution around that core they typically add many programs, utilities, applications etc. that originated with the GNU project and that are GPLed. To acknowledge these contributions, it would seem appropriate to refer to such a distribution as a GNU/Linux system. Commonly, "GNU/Linux" is shortened to plain "Linux".
Some people also refer to full fledged Linux distros as the Linux kernel with the "GNU userland" added. This terminology has been appropriated by the developers of some of the new OpenSolaris distros, e.g. Nexenta and Belenix. They describe themselves as distros based on the Solaris kernel and runtime libraries with the GNU userland added. In fact, NexentaOS (Solaris kernel plus Ubuntu userland) also calls itself Nexenta GNU/OpenSolaris (e.g. on the wallpaper of their desktop), and their web address is www.gnusolaris.org.
Robert
54 • OpenSolaris and Multimedia (by Raymond on 2006-07-12 05:41:19 GMT from Chullora, Australia)
Is OpenSolaris (and Nexenta, Belenix, Schillix) any good for serious multimedia work like video and audio editing? There doesn't seem to be many such apps for it - just mostly shell-based apps and standard GUI apps for Internet, and playing video and audio. Maybe it is more an office-based OS. Also, has anyone been able to watch TV with OpenSolaris?
55 • Name Debate (by UltraZelda64 on 2006-07-12 06:54:55 GMT from Alliance, United States)
Oh no, I just so happen to say "Linux" with more of an American accent to it. Lie-nucks. Yeah, I know it's meant to be "lin-nicks," but who cares? Hell, I never add the extra "Slash Guh-Noo" either, so I'm in double jeopardy for the same OS name. :O
Bottom line - Linux was called just-plain Linux for so many years before FSF started asking for their name to be acknowledged as well. I believe it is up to the creators of the distro as to which version they use. If Debian wants to be called "Debian GNU/Linux," that's their call. If SUSE wants to be SUSE Linux, let 'em be. If someone doesn't feel like regularly spewing out tongue-twisters when talking about operating systems, simply calling their favorite distros "Linux" is sufficient enough.
I know what the GNU project has done, but I think it's just plain stupid that they want *any* Linux distribution which includes GNU applications to be called "Guh-Noo Slash Linux." OpenOffice.org might as well ask distributions to add "OOo" to their distro names as well, then, if that's the case. As long as it's understood how Linux, GNU, etc. came to be, I see no problem.
And honestly, if someone will go so far as to look outside of their typical Windows or Mac world as other possibilities, chances are they'll *READ UP* on anything before they even attempt to try it. For example - one of the first things I learned about when looking up info on Linux was the philosophy of "free software," which led me to - you guessed it - GNU.org and FSF.org.
A name is a name. Both GNU/Linux and Linux are considered "proper," so take your pick. Me, I'll stick with just plain Linux. It gets the job done, and doesn't get your tongue tied up in a knot in the process.
56 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-12 07:22:42 GMT from , United States)
"OpenOffice.org might as well ask distributions to add "OOo" to their distro names as well, then, if that's the case. "
No. the situation is not the same. An office system is not part of any agreed upon standard for what constitutes a Unix system. A C library, a shell, and basic utilities are.
Call it "Linux" if you like, but don't misrepresent the situation.
57 • BSD fragmentation? (by Amavida on 2006-07-12 11:18:49 GMT from Fern Tree Gully, Australia)
It's great to see these desktop oriented FreeBSD based OS's being released (PC-BSD, TrueBSD etc).
Does have anyone have any info about whether the authors of these are taking wholsale liberties with the file locations/file system layout the way Linux distro authors do?
Frankly this criticism has held me back from fully embracing Linux because I dislike that there is no ONE Linux, instead there over 500 different more or less incompatible versions of 'Linux'.
58 • Debian whining about Ubuntu (by Amavida on 2006-07-12 11:47:51 GMT from Fern Tree Gully, Australia)
Seems to me authors of Ubuntu tok a lok at Debian & concluded it neded two things :
1) Make Debian more user friendly for desktop users for God's Sakes! - Ubunti have succeeded while Debian moves forward with it's usual glacial slowness. Result? Debian dev's are jealous... I say tough luck.
2) Make Debian more up to date. Ubuntu have succeeded in bring in much more recent versions of apps & desktop environments. These CANNOT be aded to Debian because it is so far behind. Debian devs blame Ubuntu, whine & throw tantrums... I say tough luck.
This whole episode throws Debian in a bad light. They come across as incapable of change & immature.
59 • TrueBSD (by Wiktar Gr. on 2006-07-12 12:36:36 GMT from Minsk, Belarus)
Hello dear friends.
I see the TrueBSD page and connecting to it's author.
I must tell you that:
Author of TrueBSD is from Belarus (and NOT Russia). It is different country.
The main language of TrueBSD is russian, but developer is belarusian.
Wiktar.
60 • Re: 26 • Morphix offline? (by Ariszló on 2006-07-12 12:38:43 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
It's up again:
http://www.morphix.org/
http://www.morphix.org/index.php?option=com_joomlaboard
http://sourceforge.net/projects/morphix
61 • For Turboalert to work, however, it was first necessary to "obtain a license". (by Misty on 2006-07-12 21:23:30 GMT from Valley Stream, United States)
"And this is where I started noticing some similarities between Turbolinux 11 and another commercial distribution released recently - Xandros Desktop 4. In both cases the product would work, but access to software updates required the extra registration step. "
I'd have stopped right there and then wiped it off my computer. Why are we putting up with this from Linux developers when we have refused to put up with it from MS for years now? I'd say just don't use those distros but this crap seems to be spreading. It's beginning to look like that you'll only be free of this only with distros where the devs pride themselves on its freedom before long.
62 • 61 (by tom on 2006-07-12 22:22:47 GMT from Helena, United States)
I second that.
63 • Misty (by AC on 2006-07-12 23:08:09 GMT from , United States)
Right on, Sister!
64 • Unix/GNU (by Ariszló on 2006-07-13 07:30:09 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
AC wrote: An office system is not part of any agreed upon standard for what constitutes a Unix system. A C library, a shell, and basic utilities are.
First, the second sentence. Yes, you need a shell but it does not have to be bash and even glibc could be replaced (at least theoretically) with any other C library. More on this: http://www.usermode.org/docs/gnulinux.html
Second, the first sentence. If "GNU is Not Unix" then it is irrelevant what makes a Unix system. If it is Unix (as it is) then it should give credit to Unix in its name: Unix/GNU. If credit is already given in the name (GNU is Not Unix) then you don't need GNU in GNU/Linux either because, as everyone knows ;-), Linux is a recursive acronym of 'Linux Is Not UniX' and by repeating the 'Not Unix' part in its name it gives credit to GNU as nicely as GNU gives credit to Unix.
AC also wrote: I'm not saying that you can't call it "Linux". You're entitled to your preference. And I am entitled to appreciate that Debian and Source Mage say "GNU/Linux" and those projects are entitled to call it that.
Yes, I agree. I would never suggest that Debian should change its name from Debian GNU/Linux to Debian Linux. However, some people seem to believe that they are also entitled to change the names of other people's projects. Here is an example how one guy "corrects" Slackware's logo:
http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=20269
65 • 64 (by Anonymous on 2006-07-13 08:07:49 GMT from , United States)
I've read the arguments in your link previously and all that they show is that it is possible to have a Linux system that is not a GNU/Linux system. This is hardly a surprise. It's also possible to have a GNU system that is not a GNU/Linux system, e.g. GNU/kFreeBSD, GNU/NetBSD, GNU Hurd, GNU/Minix.
That in no way changes that fact that the majority of Linux distributions are Unix-like by virtue of including GNU glibc, coreutils, et al. No one says that embedded systems that include the Linux kernel without the GNU libraries and such should be called "GNU/Linux". Stallman acknowledges this.
One reason for not using the name Unix is that it is trademarked. Giving credit where it would subject you to legal attacks from the owners of the name being credited is hardly obligatory. For the same reason, we shouldn't fault CentOS for failing to credit Red Hat. That argument is a red herring.
As for the Slackware logo, I don't think much about it either way. It would appear to fall under "fair use", so I doubt Pat can complain. It strikes me as rather silly, a pretty weak joke, especially considering the effort involved in making it. It doesn't strike me as an attempt to change Slackware's name (IIf it is such an attempt, it's a pretty feeble and pointless one.), but of course, someone who creates and maintains a project gets to decide what to call it. I happen to appreciate those who call it "GNU/Linux" - though I hasten to add that what I appreciate more is an open and democratic development process with a clear social contract and set of policies.
66 • OS vs. Distribution (by Ariszló on 2006-07-13 08:18:53 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
Still on AC's first sentence. UltraZelda64 wrote about distributions, not operating systems so she did not misrepresent the situation.
67 • 65 (by Ariszló on 2006-07-13 08:23:30 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
AC wrote: I happen to appreciate those who call it "GNU/Linux" - though I hasten to add that what I appreciate more is an open and democratic development process with a clear social contract and set of policies.
Yes, that's the point, not names.
68 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-13 08:28:36 GMT from , United States)
A distribution in this case is a distribution of an operating system, so you're making a distinction without a difference. I agree that distributors should call their distributions whatever they believe appropriate - though I also believe that the FSF has a right to campaign for a change of name - but it is a gross misrepresentation to suggest that an office suite or a web browser play an alogous role to a C library in creating either an operating system OR a distribution.
69 • No subject (by Anonymous on 2006-07-13 08:29:33 GMT from , United States)
an analogous
70 • 68 (by Ariszló on 2006-07-13 08:45:46 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
No. When people download the isos or buy the disks, they get much more than an operating system. You don't need to name a distribution after the OS. Neither Sun Java Desktop System, nor Underground Desktop has Linux or GNU in its name (both failed, though).
71 • 70 (by AC on 2006-07-13 09:02:17 GMT from , United States)
For that matter, Ubuntu's official name is simply "Ubuntu", not "Ubuntu Linux". And they haven't failed... yet. However, I never said that distributions are only distributions of an operating system or that recipients get nothing else. I said that a distribution in this case, i.e. talking about "Linux distributions" is a distribution of an operating system. first and foremost. A Unix-like operating system. Linux by itself is not a Unix-like operating system. GNU/Linux is.
72 • 71 (by Ariszló on 2006-07-13 09:17:43 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
It depends on what you mean by 'Linux.' It may mean the Linux kernel (like earth means soil), or Linux (like Earth means the planet). In English it usually means Linux but in GNUSpeak it is only the kernel.
73 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-13 09:25:07 GMT from , United States)
Using your own principle, that people who create projects get to name them, Linus Torvalds gets to name the kernel - Linux. He doesn't get to name the entire Unix-like system. No single person does because it isn't a single unfied project. (But I needn't repeat who initiated the overall goal of a Free Unix-like operating system.) To insinuate that those who don't call the whole system "Linux" are somehow not speaking English or to compare there usage to something Orwellian is merely ad hominem nonsense that merits no further response.
74 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-13 09:51:23 GMT from , United States)
At the risk of dignifying your remarks with more reply than they deserve, it should be noted that it is not only RMS fans, FSF supporters, or whatever, that say that Linux names only the kernel. BSD partisans say the same. I suppose they aren't speaking English either. Good of you to set us all straight on what constitutes plain English.
75 • 73 (by Ariszló on 2006-07-13 10:19:23 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
Yes, Linus only named the kernel. It was the community of English speakers who extended the meaning of Linux from the kernel to the whole thing. The meaning of words change during time. Garble originally meant 'to sort out' but now it means just the opposite.
If Linux still meant the kernel then a campaign to teach people that they should only use Linux for the kernel and use something else for the OS would be meaningless. When people speak about the kernel, they usually say the Linux kernel or just kernel.
The reference to Orwellian NewSpeak was rude. Sorry for that.
76 • To Pierre, on Debian/Ubuntu (by Béranger on 2006-07-13 10:27:18 GMT from Bucuresti, Romania)
You said: "Sure it's a nice and friendly thing to do, but the does the GPL oblige that? Not the way I understand it! If Debian devs can't import back patches..."
It's a MORAL / ETHICAL obligation, not a legal one.
They can't "import back patches" because Canonical is EMPLOYING part of the Debian developers, to work for Ubuntu!
They don't have PHYSICAL time to work for Debian too!
Divide et impera. Buy out and shutdown. Conquering the world by the means of Mark Shuttleworth.
77 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-13 10:41:45 GMT from , United States)
Apology accepted.
And I agree that the extended usage of "Linux" has entered the English language. I'd add however, that saying "Linux by itself" provides a reasonable context clue as to what I meant.
78 • Italics (by Ariszló on 2006-07-13 10:58:58 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
Oops, I should have closed italics with </i>.
79 • Here's where I run into difficulties (by AC on 2006-07-13 11:02:28 GMT from , United States)
If the argument is this:
"Linux" is the name of the kernel (undisputed fact)
"kernel" and "operating system" are synonymous (one definition of "operating system")
Therefore, "Linux" is the name of the operating system
I have no problem with this reasoning. There is a well-established usage of "operating system" that is synonymous with "kernel".
There are other senses of "operating system" however, including the sense in which we speak of a Unix-like operating system, and in that sense, the GNU utilities are a necessary component.
But to then turn around and say, instead of your earlier argument that "kernel" and "OS" are equivalent, that "Linux" is now the name of the whole assemblage, GNU libraries and utilities and who knows what else, strikes me as a bait and switch.
And an established usage of "Linux" isn't decisive here, because it's unclear if people are using "Linux" for the name of an OS in the first sense (a kernel) or the second (requiring some additional components)
80 • PCLinuxOS .93 ? (by Anonymous on 2006-07-13 12:01:10 GMT from Ploiesti, Romania)
I hate to break the "Linux, wherefore art thou GNU" debate, but does anybody know when PCLinuxOS .93 will be released ? I know you can update .92, but I only have the ATI version and I have recently switched to NVIDIA. I wouldn't want to download .92 again, if .93 is around the corner.
That Texstar guy is so secretive ! But he does a great job developing PCLinuxOS, so I forgive him :)
81 • I like linux os - Who cares bout debian vs ubuntu? (by lav at 2006-07-13 12:10:09 GMT from Parow, South Africa)
I have been using linux for about a year now and still donno how to make my own distro.
I have used Suse 9.1, pclinuxos 9.1 and 9.2, mandrake 9, slax 5 and the new one, knoppix, ubuntu, xandros, and old corel linux, fedora core 4, debian 3.1, ubuntu, simply mepis, puppy linux, dsl, feather linux, Gentoo, elive, turbolinux and
a bunch of them,
I am still a newbie or at least consider myself to be. It doesnt matter what linux you are using, as long as it is open source, you complain it doesnt work or this and that and debian vs ubuntu. If you are so ungratefull why dont you just make youre own distro. They are all free, if they not change the situation make your own. Use one of them that are free.There are to many fights between linux users. Thats why linux is not ready for the general desktop. To many people dissagree on which one to use. Just use linux it works on most pc's. stop making such a fuss. get a life. I like linux. its nicer than windows and it works and its free.
stop complaining
82 • Re: Here's where I run into difficulties (by Ariszló on 2006-07-13 12:23:30 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
The kernel of FreeBSD is called the FreeBSD kernel and the kernel of Windows is called the Windows kernel. What's wrong then with calling the kernel of Linux the Linux kernel? With FreeBSD and Windows the kernel is named after the whole assemblage while with Linux it is the other way round.
It is very common to name things after their parts. A strawberry may mean both the fruit and the plant. A typical Linux distribution is an assemblage of Linux, GNU, and many other libraries and applications. If you refer to it as Linux then you name the whole after one component. If you refer to it as GNU/Linux then you name the whole after two components. Both are synecdoches.
A synecdoche necessarily leads to ambiguity but for most people Linux is no longer ambiguous. If you are not satisfied with the binary kernel shipped with distribution you use then you build your own kernel. You see? You build your own kernel, not your own Linux (that would be something like Linux From Scratch). Ambiguity only arises in dialogs where one speaker uses GNU's terminology (GNU/Linux vs. Linux) and the other speaker uses non-philosophical terminology (Linux vs. Linux kernel).
83 • # 81 (by Anonymous on 2006-07-13 15:58:04 GMT from Brasília, Brazil)
"I have been using linux for about a year now and still donno how to make my own distro."
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/
84 • Re: 80 • PCLinuxOS .93 ? (by johncoom on 2006-07-13 16:35:38 GMT from Camberley, United Kingdom)
QUOTE
when PCLinuxOS .93 will be released ?
------- snip --------
That Texstar guy is so secretive ! But he does a great job developing PCLinuxOS, so I forgive him :)
END QUOTE
Please note Texstar is NOT being secretive at all
The problem he has with giving a fixed date is that PCLinuxOS is dependant on other software being ready and finalised and stable.
This covers things from the Kernel it self + all other apps-packages
Until Texstar is confident that every thing is 100% working - he will not bother to issue the final PCLinuxOS .93
After all I want a stable and 'it just works' distro - don't you ?
and I am prepaired to wait for it (just look at what happened with the latest issues of some of the bigger GNU/Linux Distributions - there were many problems with them due to issuing to a dead line - rather than when they were really ready.
So to quote Texstar and others in the forums at http://pclinuxos.com
IT WILL BE READY WHEN IT IS READY (this is not being secretive)
85 • No subject (by Anonymous on 2006-07-13 16:55:16 GMT from Alliance, United States)
"Using your own principle, that people who create projects get to name them, Linus Torvalds gets to name the kernel - Linux. He doesn't get to name the entire Unix-like system."
Yes, but it's up to the creators of the distributions to name their own distros. You might as well complain to distro maintainers if you really hate the fact that "GNU/Linux" is not mentioned in the names of most of them. Personally, I like how BLAG is named: BLAG Linux and GNU. Perfectly captures the name of the project, the name of the kernel, and the GNU project in a somewhat more pleasant to look at way. Not to mention, it is easier to pronounce, and just makes more sense. GNU's request to come *first* before Linux just comes off as sounding selfish and jealous to me, as is talked about in the links in post 45.
"'Linux' is the name of the kernel (undisputed fact)
'kernel' and "operating system" are synonymous (one definition of 'operating system')
Therefore, "Linux" is the name of the operating system"
This is the way I look at it. I perfectly understand the differences of each, but saying "Linux" simply makes more sense, is less of a mouthfull, and will continue to be the way I refer to a typical "Linux" distro/OS.
86 • RE: 80 (by Anonymous on 2006-07-13 17:34:22 GMT from Ploiesti, Romania)
johncoom wrote:
Please note Texstar is NOT being secretive at all
The problem he has with giving a fixed date is that PCLinuxOS is dependant on other software being ready and finalised and stable.
This covers things from the Kernel it self + all other apps-packages
Until Texstar is confident that every thing is 100% working - he will not bother to issue the final PCLinuxOS .93
After all I want a stable and 'it just works' distro - don't you ?
and I am prepaired to wait for it (just look at what happened with the latest issues of some of the bigger GNU/Linux Distributions - there were many problems with them due to issuing to a dead line - rather than when they were really ready.
So to quote Texstar and others in the forums at http://pclinuxos.com
IT WILL BE READY WHEN IT IS READY (this is not being secretive)
The part about Texstar being "secretive" was not a complaint. I applaud his "it's ready when it's ready" approach. That was one of the qualities of open source that I read about before trying Linux for the first time, but it seems few projects work like that.
But I would like to be able to read somewhere about the. 93 development process: an ETA, however approximate, what's working and what's not, what new versions they are waiting for... stuff like that.
87 • Info update is in order? Maybe? (by Mr. Pink on 2006-07-13 19:18:42 GMT from Redmond, United States)
From Sentry Firewall CD web page:
News:
[ 03.18.06 ] As many of you have probably already discovered, development of the Sentry Firewall CD has been sparse for the past year or so. I regret that I simply have had very little time to continue development of this project. So, for now, it seems that the Sentry Firewall CD project has stalled indefinitely. I will certainly keep the community updated if this situation changes.
I would like to say that I've had a great time working on this project, and I've really enjoyed working with all of you. If you take a look at the README file that comes with the CD (and is also available on this website) you will see a short list of folks that have contributed in some way to better the Sentry Firewall project. I know this list represents only a very small fraction of the community that has actually contributed. If you have contributed at all to this project in the past and your name is not mentioned in the README, then please email me so I can add your name.
Also, if there is someone out there that would like to take what I've done with the Sentry Firewall CD and continue to update and develop it, I would most certainly love to help. I am also open to allowing some individuals make use of the Sentry Firewall name and this website to continue development of this project in a more community-based manner. Please feel free to contact me if you are interested in taking on this project.
Thank you all again :-)
Steve
Ladislav?
88 • 86 • RE: 80 (by johncoom on 2006-07-13 19:21:08 GMT from Camberley, United Kingdom)
Ploiesti of Romania wrote
QUOTE
But I would like to be able to read somewhere about the. 93 development process: an ETA, however approximate, what's working and what's not, what new versions they are waiting for... stuff like that.
END QUOTE
Well if you took the time to look through the PCLinuxOS forums ( http://pclinuxos.com/forum ) you would get some sort of an answer :0)
core lover ducks - I got to do your homework for you now ? have I ?
Look in this forum = PCLinuxOS General News and Announcements
for this = 0.93 ETA (notice it is locked topic now so you can not reply)
You will never find an 'exact date' answer = its ready when its ready
my best guess = early August - but I am probably going to be wrong
89 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-13 21:08:10 GMT from , United States)
"Ambiguity only arises in dialogs where one speaker uses GNU's terminology (GNU/Linux vs. Linux) and the other speaker uses non-philosophical terminology (Linux vs. Linux kernel)"
Rubbish. The ADT Foundation makes no mention of GNU but plays on the ambiguity of using "Linux" to refer to a whole assemblage to instill in their readers (policy makers, business analysts, et al) a sense that it is terribly implausible that Linux was created by one man without plagiarism.
90 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-13 21:11:45 GMT from , United States)
You're of course right about synecdoche, but I note that in your case and in the case of most people who dispute the use of "GNU/Linux", that's not how you start. You start with the argument that the kernel is the OS. Then you slide to a different use of "OS" and insist that it is legitimate to call the whole assemblage "Linux". But you wouldn't make the first move if you didn't recognize on some level that the second move, on its own, is a misrepresentation. You you use the equivocal use of "OS" to cover up the injustice and hope no one enquires further.
91 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-13 21:15:39 GMT from , United States)
"Ambiguity only arises in dialogs where one speaker uses GNU's terminology (GNU/Linux vs. Linux) and the other speaker uses non-philosophical terminology (Linux vs. Linux kernel)"
Another counter-example. Talk to a BSD partisan and expect to be told that that Linux is just a kernel, while, e.g. FreeBSD is an entire OS. Again, no mention of GNU. No place to blame those pesky FSF people for muddying the waters.
92 • never trust a catchy acronym (by AC on 2006-07-13 21:27:39 GMT from , United States)
The LAMP stack: Linux, Apache, MySQL, Perl. Commonly referred to in server administration.
Apparently, Apache is not part of "Linux". It's listed separately. So too is MySQL. And Perl.
We can ignore X, windows managers, office suites, and web browsers, as these needn't be installed on a server.
But you do need the GNU software. And "Linux" has swallowed those whole.
Ah, but "GLAMP" isn't a word.
Just like "GNU/Linux" is so damned hard to say.
It's also easier to say "Muslims" than "Muslim extremists who support the use of violence specifically targeting civilians". but that doesn't make it right to substitute one expression for the other.
93 • Sliding (by Ariszló on 2006-07-13 22:09:59 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
OK, let me clarify it. Operating systems do not normally have separate names for their kernels. The kernel of FreeBSD is called the FreeBSD kernel and the kernel of NetBSD is called the NetBSD kernel. If it is OK to name the kernel after the OS (assemblage) then what's wrong with naming the OS (assemblage) after the kernel? Since most OS's use the same name for both the assemblage and its kernel, why should it be different with Linux?
It is irrelevant whether an operating system refers to the assemblage or just the kernel because both are called the same (except that you add kernel after the name of the big OS when you refer to the kernel).
What would be a proper general term for any OS built on top of the Linux kernel including both OS's with the GNU userland and those without? If Linux (what else?) then are GNU/Linux distributions a subset of all the Linuxes?
Acknowledging GNU within the name of Linux very much reminds me of some GPL incompatible free software licenses:
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses
94 • Re: [It's also easier to say...] (by Ariszló on 2006-07-13 22:26:43 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
The two issues are totally different. Not adding GNU to the name of Linux does not blame a whole community for the deeds of its extremist members. It just leaves out what reminds me of "obnoxious BSD advertising clause'':
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html
95 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-13 23:53:19 GMT from , United States)
"If it is OK to name the kernel after the OS (assemblage) then what's wrong with naming the OS (assemblage) after the kernel? Since most OS's use the same name for both the assemblage and its kernel, why should it be different with Linux?"
Because in an important sense, these other cases are not "assemblages": they are built as a whole, the product of a single project, so credit for the whole and credit for a part is given equally whether or not we equivocate between speaking of the whole or a part.
"It is irrelevant whether an operating system refers to the assemblage or just the kernel because both are called the same"
If it is irrelevant, than why do critics of the name "GNU/Linux" so often start their argument, as you did, by using the definition of "OS" that is synonymous with the kernel?
"What would be a proper general term for any OS built on top of the Linux kernel including both OS's with the GNU userland and those without?"
Who says that there must be such a general term? There's "GNU/Linux" and there's "Linux" for systems (e.g. embedded systems) that are largely just Linux. And there could be */Linux for whatever * userland one uses.
"Acknowledging GNU within the name of Linux very much reminds me of some GPL incompatible free software licenses"
Your reminiscences are beside the point when the two situations are distinct. "GNU/Linux" is a recommendation. The only thing wrong with the BSD advertising clause is that it makes a courtesy, a reasonable request, into an imposition enforced by means of a license, and in so doing creates a slippery slope.
Acknowledgement is a courtesy and a matter of fairness. A license mandating such a thing would be a different matter but no draft of GPL 3.0 includes such a mandate nor do any of RMS's writings even suggest such a thing.
And there is no slippery slope in using "GNU/Linux" to describe what constitutres an OS in the same sense that we speak of an OS as being a flavor of Unix. KDE, Mozilla, Apache, et al, have never been considered part of the definition of a Unix-like system.
"Not adding GNU to the name of Linux does not blame a whole community for the deeds of its extremist members"
Yes, but the argument that such and such is easier to say, if it were a valid argument, would apply equally to that case as to this one.
96 • Just to be clear (by AC on 2006-07-14 04:00:47 GMT from , United States)
We may get so into specific arguments that my position itself is unclear.
If someone says that they're going to call the whole thing (whatever that entails) "Linux", because that's what everybody does and it's easier to say and everybody (almost everybody - GNU people aren't the only one's who may find ambiguity) will know what I mean, whether it's fair or not, because I can't be bothered with such debates....
If someone says that, I have no objection whatsoever.
But don't try to tell me its more technically correct by playing a shell game with the meaning of "operating system", don't try to tell me that the varying usages are perfectly clear and that the ambiguity is only created by GNU people, when a lot of people have trouble with it, and don't try to tell me that RMS and the FSF are just being unreasonable in preferring and recommending that people say "GNU/Linux".
97 • Name (by UltraZelda64 on 2006-07-14 06:56:53 GMT from Alliance, United States)
AC, you seem to be hell-bent on getting the names "just right." And not just that, making sure *other people* get the name just right. That is, in *your* (and probably the FSF's) dictionary. Why not just let go of the philosophy crap just a bit? Sure, the Free Software philosophy is great - but why not just let it go and let people take it how they will? I'm sure the majority of users understand it at least to an extent, and simply prefer *NOT* to follow it all the way down to the "proper" SPELLING/PRONUNCIATION.
The problem is, there is no "proper" name for an ISO containing the Linux kernel, GNU programs, and various additional programs. Linus himself says that "it's up to the distro to decide the name of their distro/OS." [paraphrased] I *COMPLETELY* agree with that statement. The FSF says, "call it GNU/Linux! Don't leave us out! We originally wanted to create a "free" OS in the first place, even if we didn't yet create the absolute heart of it yet! We don't give a damn if we provide only a small fraction of the overall resulting operating system and the basic philosophic free-software crap, include us!"
I say, who the hell cares? Get that damn HURD out for once and THEN start arguing about the GNU vs. Linux name. As long as you understand the whole thing (the GNU, free software, Linux, etc.) and why one of them effects/enhances the other, and even "completes" it in a way, what's the problem? My question is: who gives a damn?! Seriously, who cares if someone prefers to call it something other than you do? Seriously, leave it alone.
98 • 97 (by AC on 2006-07-14 07:34:45 GMT from , United States)
I thought I made pretty clear in my last post that I don't object if someone just happens to prefer "Linux" as the name for a larger assemblage of software. I just object to certain arguments made in defense of that usage.
Studying a bit more "philosophy crap" might allow you to better follow what people are saying.
99 • Incidentally (by AC on 2006-07-14 08:56:29 GMT from , United States)
If referring to the philosophy that spurred the movement that made the whole thing possible as "philosophic free software crap" is any indication og the mindset that omitting "GNU" reflects, then there are very good reasons for more education.
As for "a small fraction", that's if you define operating system in the opposite direction of saying any operating system is just a kernel and instead define it as everything included in a distribution.
But if you count as an operating system what it takes to make a system that approaches the Single Unix Specification, e.g. those of Priority:important in a Debian system, or what it takes for a system to count as a Unix flavor, then the bulk of the prgrams as well as the largest programs, are GNU programs.
On my own development system, where there's no X, the largest single program is GNU Emacs and the great majority of packages are GNU. Does that mean I am using a different "operating system" than someone whose largest package is something else? Get real.
.
100 • Maybe not... (by UZ64 on 2006-07-14 09:07:45 GMT from Alliance, United States)
"On my own development system, where there's no X, the largest single program is GNU Emacs and the great majority of packages are GNU. Does that mean I am using a different "operating system" than someone whose largest package is something else? Get real."
Maybe not... but it probably means you need to lighten up and not take everything so damn seriously. I mean, come on. The typical DESKTOP user who has just attempted (or switched to) Linux surely won't be using anything close to what you describe. If you think you're in the mass majority and for some reason think you have the mind of everyone else who tries Linux, think again.
101 • Three Meanings of OS (by Ariszló on 2006-07-14 09:29:43 GMT from Szeged, Hungary)
Operating system has been used in three different senses so far in this week's comments:
1. kernel (narrowest sense)
2. a system satisfying the Single Unix Specification
3. the whole thing (widest sense)
Neither 1, nor 3 justifies calling the OS GNU/Linux. Only 2 does. Neither Linux, nor the freely available BSD systems are registered as SUS compliant:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specification
102 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-14 09:33:26 GMT from , United States)
"Maybe not... but it probably means you need to lighten up and not take everything so damn seriously. I mean, come on. The typical DESKTOP user who has just attempted (or switched to) Linux surely won't be using anything close to what you describe. If you think you're in the mass majority and for some reason think you have the mind of everyone else who tries Linux, think again."
If we define "operating system" as what the typical desktop user has installed, then yes, GNU programs are a small fraction (though not that small) of the operating system. But my point is that, if one defines "operating system" in that manner, one would have to say that those who have similarly minimalistic systems are using a different operating system, which is absurd. This has nothing to do with the majority and everything to do with logical consistency.
But let me repeat: it's all well and good to say, "I don't care about logically consistent terminology, I don't care about making a statement about the Free Software movement everytime I tell someone what OS I use, I just want to use the words most people use because it's easier that way." If that's your position, fine. I really have no argument against that and can only shrug and say that my preference is different.
But when you come up with fallacious arguments to support your own preference, expect to be challenged on that.
103 • logically consistent terminology (by Ariszló on 2006-07-14 09:44:35 GMT from Szeged, Hungary)
What is inconsistent in using one word for the assemblage (Linux) and a phrase for the kernel (Linux kernel)?
104 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-14 10:02:45 GMT from , United States)
"Operating system has been used in three different senses so far in this week's comments:"
"2. a system satisfying the Single Unix Specification"
"Neither Linux, nor the freely available BSD systems are registered as SUS compliant:"
You will note, if you re-read my posts, that I carefully avoided saying otherwise, saying instead "a system that approaches the Single Unix Specification", "the sense in which we speak of a Unix-like operating system", and "the Linux kernel by itself does not and could not consitiute a Unix system, according to the Single Unix Specification", none of which involve a claim of GNU/Linux being registered as SUS compliant. From the article to which you linked:
"Most Linux vendors do not go to the expense of certifying a given version of their distribution as meeting the SUS. Furthermore, the content of a typical Linux distribution changes so fast that recertification would be required far more often than would be financially viable."
I do seem to recall a distribution once receiving Open Group Certification. Laser Moon? Can anyone refresh my memory on this?
As for why
105 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-14 10:13:17 GMT from , United States)
My apologies. In that particular context, replying to UZ64, I'd been pointing out the logically inconsistent results one gets by defining an "operating system" as everything that a typical desktop user uses. By that usage, for example, servers are running a different operating system.
But the remark, on rewriting spilled into another context.
I' don't want to say that using "Linux" for some assemblage (but which one?) and "Linux kernel" for the kernel is logically inconsistent. Only ambiguous and unfair. But the latter is a personal judgement, of course, and the former can be circumvented by other means.
106 • No subject (by 1c3d0g on 2006-07-14 11:38:50 GMT from Oranjestad, Aruba)
#92: remember that the last one stands for 3 different languages, Perl, Python or PHP. ;-)
107 • 105 (by Ariszló on 2006-07-14 12:34:21 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
AC asks "Linux" for some assemblage (but which one?)
Anything built on top of the Linux kernel without artificially distinguishing between OS's with GNU and those without. As a rule, an OS built on top of "$OS kernel" is called $OS. Deviating from that pattern makes confusion. Using Linux for the big thing and Linux kernel for its only essential part is consistent with that pattern. GNU's current terminology is not.
Quoting from GNU's June 1994 Bulletin:
Linux: a free Unix system for 386 machines Linux (named after its main author, Linus Torvalds) is a free Unix clone that implements POSIX.1 functionality with SysV and BSD extensions. Linux has been written from scratch and contains no proprietary code. Many of the utilities and libraries are GNU Project software.
http://www.gnu.org/bulletins/bull17.html#SEC42
108 • gaming linux (by aahhaaa on 2006-07-14 18:52:31 GMT from Wyoming, United States)
the last opportunity for linux to rise above its cult following status is coming up with the release of vista. as it stands, linux just competes with itself, never taking much of a bite out of apple or ms. it takes an unusual user to get past the alphabet soup and get an appropriate distro up & running...
I'd just like to suggest that gaming (both gaming theory & gaming practice) present excellent ways to train unfrustrated newcomers- without nearly as much 'help! my mouse don't work no more' postings on the various distro forums (one of the most discouraging aspects of linux help).
A linux distro layered in mario-like competence levels would be just one way to start. A half dozen simple game plans come to mind just in understanding hd usage...
why not put more fun in the learning curve?
109 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-14 19:54:28 GMT from , United States)
"As a rule, an OS built on top of "$OS kernel" is called $OS. Deviating from that pattern makes confusion."
Show me one other example that demonstrates that rule, i.e. where the same kernel, but different libraries is called by the name of the kernel?
Oh my! I guess we shouldn't call the system I have running on Qemu, "GNU/kFreeBSD". It's just plain FreeBSD. (Try telling that to FreeBSD's developers!)
And Mac OS X. No, that's "Mach". Call it "Mach".
110 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-14 20:00:38 GMT from , United States)
"NEXTSTEP", "OPENSTEP", and "Mac OS X" are all the same operating system, "Mach", and they must quit deviating from the rule. Likewise "Darwin" and "GNU/Darwin" name the same OS. They all need to just follow the rule and call them all "Mach"!
111 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-14 20:05:12 GMT from , United States)
"Linux: a free Unix system for 386 machines Linux (named after its main author, Linus Torvalds) is a free Unix clone that implements POSIX.1 functionality with SysV and BSD extensions. Linux has been written from scratch and contains no proprietary code. Many of the utilities and libraries are GNU Project software."
First of all, the fact that someone posted something (that later bulletins revised) should be taken with a grain of salt.
Second, the ambiguity in this case illustrates precisely why there's unfairness: calling this a "Unix system", which obviously includes the utilities and libraries, but then saying that Lnus Torvalds is the "main author" is a flat out LIE. If you're going to call the whole thing "Linux", then Linus is NOT the main author!
You just keep proving my point!
112 • Patterns of OS Naming (by Ariszló on 2006-07-14 21:16:41 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
It seems that OS's that are shipped with a single desktop follow another pattern of naming the OS after the desktop. Linux and the BSDs don't follow that pattern because they offer several desktop environments to choose from.
GNU/kFreeBSD, which I tried in the form of Ging, is interesting but it seems to be more of a proof of concept than a real OS targeting a real user base.
As for who is the main author of Linux, yes, I think it is Linus. The main part of Linux (aka. GNU/Linux) is the Linux kernel whose main author is Linus.
113 • ad hoc explanations (by AC on 2006-07-14 21:26:29 GMT from , United States)
"It seems that OS's that are shipped with a single desktop follow another pattern of naming the OS after the desktop."
Ah, so your rule has exceptions.
"GNU/kFreeBSD, which I tried in the form of Ging, is interesting but it seems to be more of a proof of concept than a real OS targeting a real user base."
So, if at some point, more people used GNU/kFreeBSD, it would count, but now it doesn't. Okay.
This smacks of someone looking for rationalizations to protect an assumption.
But you know what? I'll give you those exceptions. If you do just one thing. The thing I requested earlier: show me one other example that demonstrates that rule, i.e. where the same kernel, but different libraries is called by the name of the kernel.
Just one.
Otherwise, we can just as easily say that kernels are typically named after the whole OS, rather than that the whole OS is typically named after the kernel.
114 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-14 21:27:58 GMT from , United States)
I should have specified "core libraries", because obviously you can add additional libraries to any OS.
115 • No subject (by Anonymous on 2006-07-14 21:33:27 GMT from , United States)
In the very next item in the very same bulletin to which you linked, we see an example of the other precedent:
"Debian GNU/Linux is a complete, full-featured system based on GNU and Linux that is easy to install and configure. It was initially created by Ian Murdock and has grown into an open and distributed project in which everyone is welcome to directly participate."
This also goes to refute the claim UZ64 made in 55, "Linux was called just-plain Linux for so many years before FSF started asking for their name to be acknowledged as well."
Debian, the second oldest surviving distribution of Linux and GNU tools, chose their name out of respect for the FSF request, which predates this and the other item.
Yggdrasil referred to their distribution as Linux/GNU/X in 1994.
So, the question of what to call such an assemblade isn't something the FSF just brought up after "Linux' had been well established and gotten lots of attention.
And Yggdrasil
116 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-14 21:41:41 GMT from , United States)
"As for who is the main author of Linux, yes, I think it is Linus. The main part of Linux (aka. GNU/Linux) is the Linux kernel whose main author is Linus."
I suppose that you also believe this to be true (reading "Linux" as the name of the whole assemblage):
"Linux has been written from scratch" no doubt by its "main author", Linus Torvalds.
117 • Re: ad hoc explanations (by Ariszló on 2006-07-14 22:00:55 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
Otherwise, we can just as easily say that kernels are typically named after the whole OS...
Yes, they typically are.
rather than that the whole OS is typically named after the kernel.
That's not that typical but it perfectly fits the pattern evolving from naming the kernel after the OS.
As for Debian and Yggdrasil, they are distributions, not OS's. And UZ64 is right. Linux has been called Linux since about 1991 and the first attested occurrence of GNU/Linux is from 1994.
118 • ad hoc explanations (by AC on 2006-07-14 22:01:13 GMT from , United States)
Concerning NEXTSTEP, OPENSTEP, and Mac OS X all running atop the Mach microkernel, and on the initial reading of your "rule", being the same OS, you offerred this explanation:
"It seems that OS's that are shipped with a single desktop follow another pattern of naming the OS after the desktop. Linux and the BSDs don't follow that pattern because they offer several desktop environments to choose from."
One could say that. One could equally say that these cases come down to the fact that Mach is a microkernel and as more processes are implemented in userspace, the name of the userspace becomes correspondingly more significant and the name of the kernel less so.
How would one choose between these two explanations? I don't see how, but since you're just making this stuff up as you go along, you can say whichever you like.
119 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-14 22:21:30 GMT from , United States)
"Linux has been called Linux since about 1991 and the first attested occurrence of GNU/Linux is from 1994."
First of all, I didn't know that 3 years=many years.
Second, the ambiguity creates problems for assessing how early "Linux" was used to refer to the combination of Linux (the kernel) and GNU software.
In his August 1991 posting (still not using the name "Linux" at all)
"I've currently ported bash(1.08) and gcc(1.40),and things seem to work."
So far that doesn't suggest that he considered bash part of the OS.
Going by Linus announcement (in October 1991) by which time, "Linux" is being used
"I'm also interested in hearing from anybody who has written any of the
utilities/library functions for minix"
Indicating that he'd wanted to have those built from scratch too. So, we don't have any reason to assume that he was calling the kernel plus the GNU tools "Linux".
Going by the release notes of Linux 0.01, Sept. 1991, it's clear he was not using "Linux" as the name of the whole system at that time,
"Sadly, a kernel by itself gets you nowhere. To get a working system you
need a shell, compilers, a library etc. These are separate parts and may
be under a stricter (or even looser) copyright. Most of the tools used
with linux are GNU software and are under the GNU copyleft. These tools
aren't in the distribution - ask me (or GNU) for more info."
So, where's the first case where Linux is used for the whole system? Something unambiguous?
120 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-14 22:40:16 GMT from , United States)
"As for Debian and Yggdrasil, they are distributions, not OS's."
Actually, the Debian Project refers to the "Debian system" which is ported to various architectures and kernels.
And in the item I posted, the term used is not "distribution", but "system": "Debian GNU/Linux is a complete, full-featured system based on GNU and Linux".
Building a distribution involves integration work. The items distributed, by themselves, do not constitute a "system". Only when they are integrated do you have a "system".
At least not if "system" is used in the sense that one refers to a "Unix system".
121 • What we're debating (by AC on 2006-07-14 22:48:05 GMT from , United States)
I've now twice acknowledged that I have no argument against those who simply prefer to say "Linux", e.g. because it's easier to pronounce or shorter. I just have a different preference.
You seem intent on insisting not only that "Linux" for the whole system is an acceptable and widely established usage, but that those who say "GNU/Linux' are guilty of sowing confusion, failing to follow precedents, making the distinction after the matter had been definitively settled, et al, i.e. that users of "GNU/Linux" are somehow incorrect. If you keep offerring arguments to that effect, I'll keep challenging you, but for those following along, bear this in mind: I am not the one insisting that only one usage is correct, so even if you don't share my preference for "GNU/Linux", don't be offended that I am defending my preference. I am not disputing your right to your own.
122 • Re: What we're debating (by Ariszló on 2006-07-15 13:24:59 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
I'm not offended. In fact, I like the way you are defending your preference. I can also see that you no longer insist that only one usage is correct. Although your sentence back in Comment #5 indicated otherwise, you wrote it ages ago and later you acknowledged that you were partially facetious.
123 • linux-2.6.16.24 in slackware-current/kernels (by Ariszló on 2006-07-15 13:36:20 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
After a long period of only providing 2.6 kernels in slackware-current/testing, linux-2.6.16.24 is now in slackware-current/kernels.
124 • 121 and above (by tom on 2006-07-15 13:57:37 GMT from Helena, United States)
I second that. I have no Idea what you are debating and think you are silly. In the end I could find on right answer to the debate and it seems it is a matter of choice. Linux is not better or worse a term then GNU/Linux as long as you understand the terminology.
I think "Linux" is the common term regardless of the technical merits (or lack thereof). Perhaps we should look up the term "Linux" on the web or in a dictionary.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux :
This article is about the operating system which uses the Linux kernel. For the kernel itself, see Linux kernel. For the asteroid, see 9885 Linux.
"GNU/Linux" redirects here. For the GNU project itself, see GNU.
Linux (also known as GNU/Linux, pronounced lee-nooks[1]) is a Unix-like computer operating system. It is one of the most prominent examples of open source development and free software; unlike proprietary operating systems such as Windows or Mac OS, all of its underlying source code is available to the public for anyone to freely use, modify, and redistribute.
Initially, Linux was primarily developed and used by individual enthusiasts on personal computers. Since then, Linux has gained the support of major corporations such as IBM, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, and Novell for use in servers and is gaining popularity in the desktop market[1]. It is used in systems ranging from supercomputers to mobile phones. Proponents and analysts attribute its success to its security, reliability, low cost, and freedom from vendor lock-in[2][3].
And for GNU/Linux:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU
As of 2006, a complete GNU system has not been released. The official kernel of GNU is the HURD, however, HURD is not yet finished so most GNU users use the third-party Linux kernel. While Linux has not been officially adopted as the kernel of GNU, GNU does officially include other third party software such as the Xorg windowing system and the TeX typesetting system. Versions of GNU using the Linux kernel are often called Linux, after the kernel. The GNU project asks people to call these systems "GNU/Linux." See GNU/Linux naming controversy.
and finally:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU/Linux_naming_controversy
GNU/Linux is the term promoted by the Free Software Foundation (FSF), its founder Richard Stallman, and its supporters, for operating systems composed of the FSF's GNU operating system and the Linux kernel. For historical and other reasons, most people use the term "Linux" for the whole system, one notable exception being Debian GNU/Linux.
The main argument for "GNU/Linux" is that Linus Torvalds' kernel was only the final small part of an otherwise complete system, GNU, written and assembled over many years with the explicit goal of creating an integrated free operating system.
The disagreement over the naming is related to a general debate over the primary purpose of free software: the free software movement, led by the FSF, emphasizes the "free" (as in freedom) aspect of software as an important right akin to freedom of speech, in contrast with the open source movement's argument that higher-quality software is the main goal, freedom being merely a means to an end. The FSF argues that the "GNU/Linux" name is important to credit the importance of their philosophy in addition to their technical work.
The controversy is also a reflection of a wider confusion over the distinction between "Linux" the kernel and "Linux" the operating system as a whole — of which the kernel is typically only a small part.
Any questions?
125 • "silly" (by AC on 2006-07-15 21:42:18 GMT from , United States)
"Linux is not better or worse a term then GNU/Linux as long as you understand the terminology."
"Linux" (as used to describe an assemblage that includes other software) can be used and understood as well as "GNU/Linux", but that is not to say that those who prefer one or the other usage do not have sound reasons for their preference, nor that airing those reasons cannot illuminate other issues about how we think of software, about fairness, and about freedom.
126 • 122 (by AC on 2006-07-15 21:45:15 GMT from , United States)
"I'm not offended. In fact, I like the way you are defending your preference."
And I have found you to raise issues worthy of consideration as well.
127 • No subject (by Anonymous on 2006-07-15 21:52:41 GMT from , United States)
"Although your sentence back in Comment #5 indicated otherwise, you wrote it ages ago and later you acknowledged that you were partially facetious."
Yes. If I were to state my intentions in a less facetious and more precise manner, regardiing Source Mage GNU/Linux, I might have said:
"And I appreciate for a variety of reasons that the name they chose accords with my preference for 'GNU/Linux'."
Or maybe I could have just tossed in a ;-) after saying "right name".
128 • 126 & 127 (by tom on 2006-07-16 02:40:47 GMT from La Junta, United States)
126. Preferences are fine. I am lazy. I say Linux when I mean GNU/Linux. Endless arguments are pointless. I respect your preference, please respect mine.
127. I was interested on Source mage at one time. I downloaded the install CD and tried to install.
The install failed to compile from the CD.
If I recall correctly there was the option to do a base install from the CD and finish with a network install.
I tried that as well, but never got beyond a CLI. It seemed, if I recall the terms, the "spells" did not work at that time.
How is source mage now?? Is there any review or how to you could advise. As above, I am lazy and expect the OS to at least install.
129 • Re: Debian vs Ubuntu (by Steve Bergman on 2006-07-16 02:47:35 GMT from Oklahoma City, United States)
> So why is this conflict put under the Ubuntu logo and not the debian?
I would guess because the *news* here is that Ubuntu is getting complained about. Debian devs are always complaining about something. That's not news in and of itself. The fact that Ubuntu is the target is the interesting bit.
130 • No subject (by AC on 2006-07-16 02:58:10 GMT from , United States)
"Preferences are fine. I am lazy. I say Linux when I mean GNU/Linux. Endless arguments are pointless. I respect your preference, please respect mine."
Of course.
"How is source mage now??"
Actually, it's been some time for me. Someone else's remarks had reminded me that I'd appreciated their philosophy, but I use Debian and NetBSD exclusively at present.
131 • No subject (by 1c3d0g on 2006-07-16 15:25:36 GMT from Oranjestad, Aruba)
#129: agreed. Debian developers need to grow up. And if they're fed up, hey, just fucking leave. Nobody's forcing you to develop anything. But the bitching *must stop*, it's getting very tiresome now.
132 • Kate OS Logo? (by Anonymous on 2006-07-16 17:32:51 GMT from Los Angeles, United States)
Why does Kate OS (on DistroWatch main page) have a completely different logo (icon) when the page is viewed with Opera from the logo when the page is viewed with Firefox?
133 • 131 (by AC on 2006-07-16 22:31:50 GMT from , United States)
stfu
134 • 133 (by Ariszló on 2006-07-16 23:23:28 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
Since English is not my native language, first I had to google what stfu meant. No matter how rude I find it, I agree with AC. A strange feeling, really, because I spent most of the passing week arguing against her preference. Martin Krafft' droppings are constructive. Comment #131 is not.
135 • Re: Kate OS Logo? (by Ariszló on 2006-07-16 23:32:15 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
I can see this logo with both Firefox and Opera:
http://kateos.org/img/loga/logo-emblem.png
What are you seeing with which browser?
136 • 134 Thank you, Ariszlo (by AC on 2006-07-16 23:40:37 GMT from , United States)
And not just for the support, but for adding something constructive to my off the cuff remark, which, by itself, amounted to answering stupidity with yet more stupidity.
137 • "droppings" (by AC on 2006-07-16 23:43:53 GMT from , United States)
Since, as you said, English is not your native language, I wanted to check on something. "Droppings" is often, in English, used to refer to excrement. Was this an implication you intended, i.e. that Kraft's remarks are akin to shit but constructive nonetheless? Just checking.
138 • Re: "droppings" (by Ariszló on 2006-07-16 23:52:28 GMT from Budapest, Hungary)
No, I just quoted it from his web page:
http://blog.madduck.net/
139 • 138 (by AC on 2006-07-17 00:05:27 GMT from , United States)
"No, I just quoted it from his web page:
http://blog.madduck.net/"
Wow. I'd completely overlooked that title!
Talk about self-deprecating!
Thanks again.
140 • Freespire Beta (by Chaarles Greene on 2006-07-17 06:03:58 GMT from Kingwood, United States)
I have been looking for the perfect Desktp Linux distro for some time now. Distrowatch has led me to many interesting ones.
Like many people who have tried the old Lindows, I went away frustrated by the promise of Windows compatibility that wen unfulfilled (for mostly technical, not legal reasons , as it turns out).
The second effort, called Linspire looked interesting, but with my first experience still in memory, I never went beyond a Live CD drive-by test.
I'm here to tell you that their 3rd effort, Freespire, may be a winner.
Taking lessons learned from past failures, and things they liked from other distros, they have their first Beta out, Freespire 0.0.69, which looks impressive from the get-go.
If you are willing to give the Lindows/Linspire/Freespire folks another chance, I think that you will be pleasantly surprised. I know I was.
BTW, their URL is Freespire.org, not .com. It is truly a community effort. While I am a member of their mailing list, i am not employed in any way by Linspire, but am willing to help the Freespire community build something the greater Linux community can be proud of as well as complete Linux newbies.
141 • Huh? (by 1c3d0g on 2006-07-17 11:23:02 GMT from Oranjestad, Aruba)
#133: what was that? Fuck off, loser. :-P
142 • -No DWW this week ??? (by Caraibes on 2006-07-17 12:20:41 GMT from Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic)
it's monday morning, and no DWW... Maybe Ladislav is gone in vacations...
143 • No subject (by Anonymous on 2006-07-17 12:37:16 GMT from Ploiesti, Romania)
# 141: chill, dawg!
# 142: yes, Ladislav is on vacation. Says Ladislav:
Holiday notice
It's that time of the year when your DistroWatch maintainer takes a break from his everyday routine of reporting about new distribution releases and writing DistroWatch Weekly. Although I am not planning to touch a computer during my much needed 3-week break in South Pacific, DistroWatch will continue as normal - the news section will be maintained by Dr W T Zhu (who has been helping with the site for nearly four years), while DistroWatch Weekly will be in the hands of an experienced reviewer and Linux enthusiast - Susan Linton from Tuxmachines. See you all later!
Number of Comments: 143
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 1126 (2025-06-16): SDesk 2025.05.06, renewed interest in Ubuntu Touch, a BASIC device running NetBSD, Ubuntu dropping X11 GNOME session, GNOME increases dependency on systemd, Google holding back Pixel source code, Nitrux changing its desktop, EFF turns 35 |
| • Issue 1125 (2025-06-09): RHEL 10, distributions likely to survive a decade, Murena partners with more hardware makers, GNOME tests its own distro on real hardware, Redox ports GTK and X11, Mint provides fingerprint authentication |
| • Issue 1124 (2025-06-02): Picking up a Pico, tips for protecting privacy, Rhino tests Plasma desktop, Arch installer supports snapshots, new features from UBports, Ubuntu tests monthly snapshots |
| • Issue 1123 (2025-05-26): CRUX 3.8, preventing a laptop from sleeping, FreeBSD improves laptop support, Fedora confirms GNOME X11 session being dropped, HardenedBSD introduces Rust in userland build, KDE developing a virtual machine manager |
| • Issue 1122 (2025-05-19): GoboLinux 017.01, RHEL 10.0 and Debian 12 updates, openSUSE retires YaST, running X11 apps on Wayland |
| • Issue 1121 (2025-05-12): Bluefin 41, custom file manager actions, openSUSE joins End of 10 while dropping Deepin desktop, Fedora offers tips for building atomic distros, Ubuntu considers replacing sudo with sudo-rs |
| • Issue 1120 (2025-05-05): CachyOS 250330, what it means when a distro breaks, Kali updates repository key, Trinity receives an update, UBports tests directory encryption, Gentoo faces losing key infrastructure |
| • Issue 1119 (2025-04-28): Ubuntu MATE 25.04, what is missing from Linux, CachyOS ships OCCT, Debian enters soft freeze, Fedora discusses removing X11 session from GNOME, Murena plans business services, NetBSD on a Wii |
| • Issue 1118 (2025-04-21): Fedora 42, strange characters in Vim, Nitrux introduces new package tools, Fedora extends reproducibility efforts, PINE64 updates multiple devices running Debian |
| • Issue 1117 (2025-04-14): Shebang 25.0, EndeavourOS 2025.03.19, running applications from other distros on the desktop, Debian gets APT upgrade, Mint introduces OEM options for LMDE, postmarketOS packages GNOME 48 and COSMIC, Redox testing USB support |
| • Issue 1116 (2025-04-07): The Sense HAT, Android and mobile operating systems, FreeBSD improves on laptops, openSUSE publishes many new updates, Fedora appoints new Project Leader, UBports testing VoLTE |
| • Issue 1115 (2025-03-31): GrapheneOS 2025, the rise of portable package formats, MidnightBSD and openSUSE experiment with new package management features, Plank dock reborn, key infrastructure projects lose funding, postmarketOS to focus on reliability |
| • Issue 1114 (2025-03-24): Bazzite 41, checking which processes are writing to disk, Rocky unveils new Hardened branch, GNOME 48 released, generating images for the Raspberry Pi |
| • Issue 1113 (2025-03-17): MocaccinoOS 1.8.1, how to contribute to open source, Murena extends on-line installer, Garuda tests COSMIC edition, Ubuntu to replace coreutils with Rust alternatives, Chimera Linux drops RISC-V builds |
| • Issue 1112 (2025-03-10): Solus 4.7, distros which work with Secure Boot, UBports publishes bug fix, postmarketOS considers a new name, Debian running on Android |
| • Issue 1111 (2025-03-03): Orbitiny 0.01, the effect of Ubuntu Core Desktop, Gentoo offers disk images, elementary OS invites feature ideas, FreeBSD starts PinePhone Pro port, Mint warns of upcoming Firefox issue |
| • Issue 1110 (2025-02-24): iodeOS 6.0, learning to program, Arch retiring old repositories, openSUSE makes progress on reproducible builds, Fedora is getting more serious about open hardware, Tails changes its install instructions to offer better privacy, Murena's de-Googled tablet goes on sale |
| • Issue 1109 (2025-02-17): Rhino Linux 2025.1, MX Linux 23.5 with Xfce 4.20, replacing X.Org tools with Wayland tools, GhostBSD moving its base to FreeBSD -RELEASE, Redox stabilizes its ABI, UBports testing 24.04, Asahi changing its leadership, OBS in dispute with Fedora |
| • Issue 1108 (2025-02-10): Serpent OS 0.24.6, Aurora, sharing swap between distros, Peppermint tries Void base, GTK removinglegacy technologies, Red Hat plans more AI tools for Fedora, TrueNAS merges its editions |
| • Issue 1107 (2025-02-03): siduction 2024.1.0, timing tasks, Lomiri ported to postmarketOS, Alpine joins Open Collective, a new desktop for Linux called Orbitiny |
| • Issue 1106 (2025-01-27): Adelie Linux 1.0 Beta 6, Pop!_OS 24.04 Alpha 5, detecting whether a process is inside a virtual machine, drawing graphics to NetBSD terminal, Nix ported to FreeBSD, GhostBSD hosting desktop conference |
| • Issue 1105 (2025-01-20): CentOS 10 Stream, old Flatpak bundles in software centres, Haiku ports Iceweasel, Oracle shows off debugging tools, rsync vulnerability patched |
| • Issue 1104 (2025-01-13): DAT Linux 2.0, Silly things to do with a minimal computer, Budgie prepares Wayland only releases, SteamOS coming to third-party devices, Murena upgrades its base |
| • Issue 1103 (2025-01-06): elementary OS 8.0, filtering ads with Pi-hole, Debian testing its installer, Pop!_OS faces delays, Ubuntu Studio upgrades not working, Absolute discontinued |
| • Issue 1102 (2024-12-23): Best distros of 2024, changing a process name, Fedora to expand Btrfs support and releases Asahi Remix 41, openSUSE patches out security sandbox and donations from Bottles while ending support for Leap 15.5 |
| • Issue 1101 (2024-12-16): GhostBSD 24.10.1, sending attachments from the command line, openSUSE shows off GPU assignment tool, UBports publishes security update, Murena launches its first tablet, Xfce 4.20 released |
| • 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 |
| • 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 | 
Sabily
Sabily (formerly Ubuntu Muslim Edition) was a free, open source operating system based on Ubuntu. Its main feature was the inclusion of Islamic software, such as prayer times, a Qur'an study tool and a web content filtering utility.
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.
|
|
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
