Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Debian 9 Delay, Linux PTSD, and Shells

Filed under
-s

The top story of this slightly slow new day was the announcement from Jonathan Wiltshire, Debian release assistant, stating Debian 9 would be delayed two months. Steven Ovadia dug up an interesting blog post from someone claiming to suffer from Linux Desktop PTSD and KDE announced a new community outreach program. Jason Baker posted a round-up and poll of the top five Linux shells and why do distros look so darn insecure?

Read more

Also: Debian 9 "Stretch" Freeze Delayed to Integrate Linux Kernel 4.10

More in Tux Machines

The First 10 Things to Do After Installing Kali Linux

Kali Linux is a Debian-based distro developed and maintained specifically for advanced Penetration Testing and Security by one of the world’s leading information security training companies, Offensive Security. Commonly referred to as the perfect OS for hackers, it is a complete rebuild of BackTrack Linux with full adherence to Debian development standards and was first released on 13th March, 2013, since then it has always come straight out of the box with a ton of tools geared towards Information management, Computer Forensics, Reverse Engineering, and Security research, among other tasks. Read more

Open Letter to the Linux Foundation

It seems to me that Code of Conduct complaints made in public must be immediately rejected and viewed as Code of Conduct violations in and of themselves. Code of Conduct complaints should be submitted in private and remain private and confidential in order to prevent their use as a means of harassment. It also seems to me that while the process of accepting, reviewing, and adjudicating such complaints should be public, the proceedings and decision of each individual case should remain private and confidential in order to protect the parties from harm. Making them a public showcase is, simply, horrible.

Was the Code of Conduct actually violated by Mr. Wood? I have watched the videos in question and read the tweets and I can find no instance where Mr Wood violated the LF Code of Conduct. I understand that LF can make any decision they like about what constitutes a Code of Conduct violation. However, when both the complaint and the response are so blatantly public, it seems to me that LF owes it to the observing community to explain their decision and describe the due process that was used to make it – including the decision to make the public response that undoubtedly caused harm to Mr. Wood. To date no such explanation has been forthcoming, despite repeated requests.

Read more

Android Leftovers

today's howtos