Re: Gnome 1.0 debs?
Couldn't .debs that aren't 100% at least go into potato? That's what unstable is for isn't it ? Why is there this pent up frustration for always having the absolute latest versions of software? I would have thought it may be a good idea to wait a few weeks to see if others report that there major goofs. Quality is very very important. We do want debian to be more reliable than windows 98. Unstable does not means completely untested, otherwise it would be a rather worthless minefield. If you really are so keen you could just download the source code and compile it. This is not a difficult option and by identifying any bugs you would be helping the debian community. I'll just wait, hoping that the debian people do a good job. A few weeks or so is not a long period of time. The people doing this work are not getting paid, so they probablely only have a limited time each day to do this work. Regards
Re: Gnome 1.0 debs?
The staging area is not a secret, it is publically available, too, for developers and testers. Check the dtk-gnome mailling list archiv if you are interested (or devel-announce). And by testing this you make a significant worthwhile contribution to the Debian project. Whoops ... gnome 1.0.2 is just released. Here we go again.
Re: Gnome 1.0 debs?
On Wed, Mar 10, 1999 at 10:37:29AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 3/10/99 6:44:38 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Are there Gnome 1.0 debs yet? I haven't tried Gnome yet. 1.0 seems like the place to start. Ya know, I don't want to offend any of the developers or anything, but I'm curious about something... Why is it that Debian is always the last to get packages for any given product? When KDE came out, rpms were right around the corner. This seems to be an ongoing trend... Is it just because the Debian group is so quality concious? It's a non-technical difference in the way packages are built in these sorts of cases. The Red Hat packages are built by anyone who cares to; they can go on Red Hat's unofficial rpms site no problem. Debian packages on the other hand are usually only built by Debian developers; that is, people who aren't developers don't tend to build debs and upload them; unofficial debs are rare. In the case of KDE, the RPMs were probably built by the KDE team themselves. The debs might be left to the Debian developer, who may or may not be part of the KDE team. Also, it takes a day or so for packages to appear in the archive once they are uploaded. I think the end result is a higher quality product. The lack of unofficial debs is not a shortcoming at all, imho. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3TYD [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Debian packages at ftp://ftp.rising.com.au/pub/hamish. PGP#EFA6B9D5 CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome. http://hamish.home.ml.org
Re: Gnome 1.0 debs?
On Wed, 10 Mar 1999, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: The staging area is not a secret, it is publically available, too, for developers and testers. Check the dtk-gnome mailling list archiv if you are interested (or devel-announce). Hi Marcus, Do you intend to develop installation instructions for slink users who wish to run GNOME 1.x.x without upgrading the rest of their systems to potato? [I realize that this would be secondary to getting a working group of packages.] I suspect that quite a few programs outside of GNOME would need to be upgraded as well unless gtklib 1.2 and such can coexist with the older versions in slink. Any thoughts? Thanks. Syrus. -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Syrus Nemat-Nasser [EMAIL PROTECTED]UCSD Physics Dept.
Gnome 1.0 debs?
Are there Gnome 1.0 debs yet? I haven't tried Gnome yet. 1.0 seems like the place to start. -- ...RickM...
Re: Gnome 1.0 debs?
In a message dated 3/10/99 6:44:38 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Are there Gnome 1.0 debs yet? I haven't tried Gnome yet. 1.0 seems like the place to start. Ya know, I don't want to offend any of the developers or anything, but I'm curious about something... Why is it that Debian is always the last to get packages for any given product? When KDE came out, rpms were right around the corner. This seems to be an ongoing trend... Is it just because the Debian group is so quality concious? -Jay
Re: Gnome 1.0 debs?
On Wed, 10 Mar 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ya know, I don't want to offend any of the developers or anything, but I'm curious about something... Why is it that Debian is always the last to get packages for any given product? When KDE came out, rpms were right around the corner. This seems to be an ongoing trend... Is it just because the Debian group is so quality concious? It is. There are always rpms sooner, but those rpms are invariably broken in minor ways, and since there are no official rpms and you don't know what the system they were built on was like, there's no guarantee they will work at all. Often dependencies are wrong and the like, and RPM's dependency tracking isn't as good to begin with. The Debian packages are maintained officially and strictly quality controlled by Debian policy and the lintian script. Also all the Gtk/Gnome/Imlib etc. packages are being prepared together in a staging area to be sure they work together properly. It's worth the wait, in short. Havoc
Re: Gnome 1.0 debs?
Couldn't .debs that aren't 100% at least go into potato? That's what unstable is for isn't it ? Regards Sarel Botha On Wed, 10 Mar 1999, Havoc Pennington wrote: On Wed, 10 Mar 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ya know, I don't want to offend any of the developers or anything, but I'm curious about something... Why is it that Debian is always the last to get packages for any given product? When KDE came out, rpms were right around the corner. This seems to be an ongoing trend... Is it just because the Debian group is so quality concious? It is. There are always rpms sooner, but those rpms are invariably broken in minor ways, and since there are no official rpms and you don't know what the system they were built on was like, there's no guarantee they will work at all. Often dependencies are wrong and the like, and RPM's dependency tracking isn't as good to begin with. The Debian packages are maintained officially and strictly quality controlled by Debian policy and the lintian script. Also all the Gtk/Gnome/Imlib etc. packages are being prepared together in a staging area to be sure they work together properly. It's worth the wait, in short. Havoc -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Gnome 1.0 debs?
On Wed, 10 Mar 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 3/10/99 6:44:38 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Are there Gnome 1.0 debs yet? I haven't tried Gnome yet. 1.0 seems like the place to start. Ya know, I don't want to offend any of the developers or anything, but I'm curious about something... Why is it that Debian is always the last to get packages for any given product? When KDE came out, rpms were right around the corner. This seems to be an ongoing trend... Is it just because the Debian group is so quality concious? I don't really think that KDE is the best example. For quite a while, KDE wasn't packaged because of the licensing issues. Keep in mind that there is a whole staff of full time people working on Red Hat, while Debian developers are volunteering their scarce free time.
Re: Gnome 1.0 debs?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- On Wed, 10 Mar 1999, Christopher J. Morrone wrote: I don't really think that KDE is the best example. For quite a while, KDE wasn't packaged because of the licensing issues. Actually, those licensing issues are still not resolved. The latest kde version uses Qt 1.42, which still uses the closed source license. The KDE debs are all packaged by one guy from the KDE development group. But they definitely aren't a good example of Debian packaging slowness, because they aren't official .debs. Packages that are part of the official distribution would make better examples for the sake of this argument. Keep in mind that there is a whole staff of full time people working on Red Hat, while Debian developers are volunteering their scarce free time. Actually, that's not the issue in this case. The VAST majority of RPMs out there were not packaged by anybody on the staff at Redhat. That's why they are so often inconsistant in quality, and why they're everywhere. Redhat has a larger user base than Debian, and a large number of free software developers use it. It's easy to create an rpm file, and a lot of people will write some software, then rpm it for distribution. But they don't necessarily test it on any system other than their own, and they are not required to adhere to a strict file system layout. There's no guarantee that the rpm they make will work on ANY system other than their own. That's not the case with any of the 2000-odd packages in the official Debian distribution. Debian takes the time to get things right, which is why we have to wait so long for a new release. Redhat just takes a bunch of rpms, throws them on a CD, and hopes everything works. Often times it doesn't. (that's of course a bit of an exaggeration, Redhat deserves more credit than I gave them.) I bet Debian has MANY more official developers working on it than Redhat does, even if we are volunteers. noah PGP public key available at http://lynx.dac.neu.edu/home/httpd/n/nmeyerha/mail.html or by 'finger -l [EMAIL PROTECTED]' This message was composed in a 100% Microsoft free environment. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBNubN1IdCcpBjGWoFAQE18wP/foWAqyNH/1NKKCyn1bDkTGuy0TJ7yMSP jzcRkWKuqSg0ehCbH3ClJMuk73wKlsQ8D7Fl7YWnyHThE86bLPfKPYEN8Pb3pqJL HjiRCZmYzW0TItEVQvP8WuVnFy9lK0+pAgR+Hkg6FjGm+OqG66iWV1tPiTkHhPpX X0o6G6EEYmY= =Euc0 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Gnome 1.0 debs?
On Wed, Mar 10, 1999 at 07:40:06PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Couldn't .debs that aren't 100% at least go into potato? That's what unstable is for isn't it ? We had this before, and it was unconvenient at least because of the complicated net of dependencies. The gnome stuff depends on many libraries, and if I compile something with a newer library they might be incompatible and your whole installation goes nuts and everything. It is much better for everyone if we compile a full set of packages in a staging area first and then move the whole set to potato once it looks ready. The staging area is not a secret, it is publically available, too, for developers and testers. Check the dtk-gnome mailling list archiv if you are interested (or devel-announce). Thanks, Marcus -- `Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org finger brinkmd@ Marcus Brinkmann GNUhttp://www.gnu.org master.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]for public PGP Key http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
