Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

PCLinuxOS N1PTT-TR3 RELEASED!

Filed under
PCLOS

The Ripper Gang is pleased to announce the first public beta ISO release of what will ultimately become PCLinuxOS 2009. Due to some very personal issues, Texstar has taken a temporary leave of absence, but not to worry folks, he'll be back very soon.

This beta iso features kernel 2.6.26.6.tex2, KDE 3.5.10, Open Office 2.4.1, Firefox 3.0.3, Thunderbird 2.0.0.14, Frostwire, Ktorrent, Amarok, Flash, Java JRE, Compiz-Fusion 3D and much more.

We decided to use kde3-5-10 as our default desktop as the we could not achieve a similar functionality from kde4. We will however offer kde4 as an alternative desktop environment available from the repo once we stabilize it.

We request that only our more experienced PCLinuxOS users test this beta release and report any issues with it in the forum provided specially for it.

More Here




Saga?

I didn't know there was a "saga"... I'll tell you how PCLinuxOS compares...PCLinuxOS is Mandriva done right.

Saga indeed

Ironic that a rolling release puts out a deadend beta.

Deadend beta?

What's so deadend about it? You wouldn't use any Beta as you main install, would you?

Even though PCLinuxOS is a rolling release, new releases are required every so often for users to be able to boot the CD on newer hardware. Also, some people occasionally bork their installs and have to reinstall. Reinstalling from an updated ISO makes life much easier.

Let's get something straight. If you don't like PCLinuxOS, don't use it. Badmouthing any Linux distro is downright bad for Linux in general. The enemy is not another disto, but the proprietary software overloards in Redmond, WA and Cupertino, CA. Infighting among distros is doing Linux harm when we should be united against proprietary software vendors, instead. There's something good to be said about every Linux distro out there. Try and keep it positive, will you?

PCLinuxOS vs Mandriva vs any Linux OS

There is no comparison between a commercially developed distribution and a small distro developed by a hand full of volunteers. I might remind you that Texstar created this distro to share with his friends, however those friends also wanted to share and the community just keeps growing. We like stability over 'bleeding edge' and will do our best to keep it that way. I've tried, and continually try other distros to see what's out there, but keep PCLOS as my main OS.

Linux is Linux, desktops and choices of packages are another animal altogether. So why fight over who's best. Choose what's best for you and let others do the same.

What are you talking about?

RPM is not all that compatible with newer kernels? Did anyone tell Novell and Mandriva? And to think that Novell is very heavily involved in kernel development... I guess they're just beating on a dead horse with their distros? Oh my...the laughter... Do you even have a clue?

Congrats... and some perspective

1. .deb and dpkg are fine packaging tools. However, RPM is the accepted standard, according to the Linux Standard Base. Details are here:

http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org/LSB_3.2.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/book1.html

2. As Ruel points out, Mandriva and Novell/openSUSE both use RPM. Red Hat/Fedora has not abandoned RPM, either. In fact, they are re-investing in the package format:

http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2007/02/08/the-story-of-rpm/

Most variants (e.g., PCLinuxOS, CentOS, etc.) derived from these three upstream distros use RPM (not sure if Foresight/rPath does). If anything, RPM tends to be favored by the most commercially successful distributions. Ubuntu is the only non-RPM distribution to achieve any kind of commercial traction. But, it has not been able to generate the level of commercial revenue that Red Hat, Novell, and Mandriva have, despite eclipsing all three in total usage.

3. Debian and its derivatives (e.g., Ubuntu, Dream Linux, Sidux, etc.) also operates under a rolling release strategy. Yet, these distributions also produce periodic releases. This is what PCLinuxOS is doing with 2009. Downloading updates simply becomes too time consuming, after a certain point.

4. Most distributions neither encourage nor support installs of beta releases for long term usage. Betas are for testing. A good example of Canonical's position may be found on the Ubuntu site for Intrepid Ibex, their upcoming release for Ubuntu and variants:

"Note: This is a beta release. Do not install it on production machines. The final stable version will be released on October 30th, 2008."

Source: http://www.ubuntu.com/testing/intrepid/beta

Congrats to Tex and the Ripper gang. I am anxiously looking forward to their next release. This should be an exciting season, with new releases coming from PCLinuxOS, Mandriva, openSUSE, Fedora, and Ubuntu.

RPM to kernel relation

RPM (RedHat Packet Manager) is a packet manager as is dpkg (Debian package manager). They are containers for binaries. What does it mean? It means the distro dev will pre-compile the applications (./configure make make install) and box them using rpm or deb. The kernel version is totally irrelevant as applications are built against libraries (glibc for example) and the compiler (gcc or other depending on app requirements). The only packages built against the kernel are the modules and those use the dkms (dynamic kernel module) where the modules are built for each kernel independently. Debian has now started to use dkms for their own kernel module builds so here Debian is behind.

The reason application for kernel-2.2 are not supported is that the compiler at the time is completely obsolete now and trying to build applications from the 2.2 era is impossible. Give me the name of one single application from the 2.2 era that is still used without having been updated to be compatible with newer compiler (that means no update since 2004 and no patch to adapt for newer compiler).

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

More in Tux Machines

Lessons learned from the failure of Ubuntu Touch

With the death of yet another open source/free software/Linux-based mobile platform, Ubuntu Touch, clearly it is time for us to sit down and have a frank discussion about what we in the free software world can reasonably accomplish in a mobile platform. One of the biggest issues—if not THE biggest issue—with Ubuntu Touch was that it simply had goals that were far too aggressive to reasonably achieve. It suffered from the all-too-common malady known in software development as feature creep. Read more

City Cloud gets Ubuntu Certified

European Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) provider City Network, has joined the Ubuntu Certified Public Cloud (CPC) programme. This is the second very big European win for Ubuntu after it signed up OVH earlier this month. As an Ubuntu CPC partner, City Cloud will no longer need to create, curate, patch and maintain Ubuntu images. This will all be done by Ubuntu who will then provide them to City Network. Read more

Open-spec networking Mini-ITX has 1, 2.5, and 10 GbE ports

SolidRun’s “Marvell MacchiatoBIN” is a $349, Mini-ITX networking SBC that runs Linux 4.4 on Marvell’s quad -A72 Armada 8040, and supports ODP, OFP, and NFV. SolidRun, which is known for its NXP i.MX6 based HummingBoard SBCs and Marvell Armada 38x based ClearFog Pro and scaled down ClearFog Base networking boards, has spun a $349 (and up) Marvell MacchiatoBIN SBC that showcases Marvell’s high-end Armada 8040 SoC. The 170 x 170mm “community” Mini-ITX board ships with schematics and layout files, and offers an open source, mainline Linux 4.4x BSP. Read more

Leftovers: OSS