Debian Squeeze - Backports - where? gone?

If none of the more specific forums is the right place to ask

Debian Squeeze - Backports - where? gone?

Postby mrkapqa » 2017-04-29 13:20

Hello ,

i just installed Debian Squeeze 32bit on my Macmini 1.1 and still like it very much.

Unfortunatley i am stuck at iceweasel 3.5.x and am unable to install any extensions because apparently there is a need for "signing" extensions and probably older versions of extensions don't have those signigns.

does anyone know how if squeeze backports are still active ?
if so, what is the adress?

is there another way to install firefox32 bit on the computer?


thanks
mrkapqa
 
Posts: 42
Joined: 2014-04-22 08:30

Re: Debian Squeeze - Backports - where? gone?

Postby levlaz » 2017-04-29 14:31

Debian Squeeze is EOL (End of Life)[1]. Is there a specific reason why you are trying to run such an old version?

[1] https://wiki.debian.org/LTS
Best,

Lev
Blog
User avatar
levlaz
 
Posts: 179
Joined: 2012-09-27 12:06
Location: San Francisco, CA

Re: Debian Squeeze - Backports - where? gone?

Postby dasein » 2017-04-29 16:46

mrkapqa wrote:does anyone know how if squeeze backports are still active ?

Squeeze is two (almost three) versions ago, so no, it doesn't get backports. Even more worrisome, it also doesn't get security fixes.

mrkapqa wrote:is there another way to install firefox32 bit on the computer?

There are at least two. Consult any of the many, many existing forum threads, or any of the >100,000 pages on the Web that provide instructions on how to install Firefox downloaded directly from mozilla.org. Or install the current Stable version of Debian (codenamed Jessie) and install an ESR release (version 45, I believe) from mozilla.debian.org

(In case it isn't obvious, the second option is way better.)
User avatar
dasein
 
Posts: 7775
Joined: 2011-03-04 01:06
Location: Terra Incantationum

Re: Debian Squeeze - Backports - where? gone?

Postby stevepusser » 2017-04-29 17:13

Firefox from Mozilla stopped working on a Squeeze base several versions back--it needs GTK 3, not available in such an old release.

I also have to join the chorus and question why you want to beat a dead distro into coming back to life and giving you a ride. You could at least use Wheezy (Debian 7) if you buy into the systemd FUD.
The MX Linux repositories: Backports galore! If we don't have something, just ask and we'll try--we like challenges. New packages: AzPainter 2.1.0, Pale Moon 27.4.2, Liquorix kernel 4.12-6, mpv 0.26.0, Kodi 17.3, 0ad 0.0.22, Mesa 13.0.6
User avatar
stevepusser
 
Posts: 8684
Joined: 2009-10-06 05:53

Re: Debian Squeeze - Backports - where? gone?

Postby dasein » 2017-04-29 17:38

stevepusser wrote:Firefox from Mozilla stopped working on a Squeeze base several versions back...

Ah. Thanks for the correction. I use PaleMoon, so haven't/don't/won't track arbitrary changes in Firefox.
User avatar
dasein
 
Posts: 7775
Joined: 2011-03-04 01:06
Location: Terra Incantationum

Re: Debian Squeeze - Backports - where? gone?

Postby mrkapqa » 2017-04-29 19:22

there are so many servers on debian , why putting it down``?

i found it stable and on macmini it served me very well; sad to hear that it is going to become history; i don't a computer program should be available only for a limited time unless there is a specific reason for it;
security reasons are not my primary concern; on several older computer newer debian just won't fit;
debian squeeze just runs exceptionally fine and can handle newer software too.
mrkapqa
 
Posts: 42
Joined: 2014-04-22 08:30

Re: Debian Squeeze - Backports - where? gone?

Postby darry1966 » 2017-04-29 20:01

If it works for you stick with it especially if the newer Debian spins aren't going to at least you can run Palemoon then cool and your right if older versions of software work like libreoffice and mtpaint etc don't worry.:)
darry1966
 
Posts: 3
Joined: 2017-04-29 08:19

Re: Debian Squeeze - Backports - where? gone?

Postby mrkapqa » 2017-04-29 20:10

hei, thanks for your suggestion , i will try it out.

got accostumed to iceape and iceweasel and really would have liked to be able to upgrade via backports , so i had iceape 2.7.x and then some extensions would just work fine; same for iceweasel;

maybe palemoon is a good alternative, lets see.


still i would recoomend not let debian-backports down for older releases,
accomplisehd routines should hold.
mrkapqa
 
Posts: 42
Joined: 2014-04-22 08:30

Re: Debian Squeeze - Backports - where? gone?

Postby mrkapqa » 2017-04-29 20:12

btw, what about this signing issue for iceweasel extensions?
mrkapqa
 
Posts: 42
Joined: 2014-04-22 08:30

Re: Debian Squeeze - Backports - where? gone?

Postby stevepusser » 2017-04-29 21:30

It's not hate, it's more like advice not to run insecure software on the Net. But it's your machine, so you can take whatever risks you wish. However, you are asking for advice on how to do something that no one else is willing to do--so I doubt you'll find out how to get the extensions working on ancient software.

Also, the current Pale Moon requires a minimum of gcc-4.7, so the chances of it working on Squeeze are slim to none. You could run an outdated version of it, but then the same security issues will crop up.
The MX Linux repositories: Backports galore! If we don't have something, just ask and we'll try--we like challenges. New packages: AzPainter 2.1.0, Pale Moon 27.4.2, Liquorix kernel 4.12-6, mpv 0.26.0, Kodi 17.3, 0ad 0.0.22, Mesa 13.0.6
User avatar
stevepusser
 
Posts: 8684
Joined: 2009-10-06 05:53

Re: Debian Squeeze - Backports - where? gone?

Postby darry1966 » 2017-04-29 22:24

mrkapqa wrote:hei, thanks for your suggestion , i will try it out.

got accostumed to iceape and iceweasel and really would have liked to be able to upgrade via backports , so i had iceape 2.7.x and then some extensions would just work fine; same for iceweasel;

maybe palemoon is a good alternative, lets see.


still i would recoomend not let debian-backports down for older releases,
accomplisehd routines should hold.



Try the one from here and keep an eye on this thread:
ftp://contrib:get@ftp.palemoon.org/SSE- ... 86.tar.bz2
https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.ph ... 40&t=13530

Download extract with xarchiver or similar to a folder would be interested to know your results.
darry1966
 
Posts: 3
Joined: 2017-04-29 08:19

Re: Debian Squeeze - Backports - where? gone?

Postby stevepusser » 2017-04-30 02:29

Why do you think that the version of PM that doesn't require sse2 (which the mac mini supports) is going to lower the gcc requirement?

BTW, thanks for the info that there was a new release, since I manage the not-a-PPA repository for it; "approved third party builds" describes them: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show ... r/palemoon
The MX Linux repositories: Backports galore! If we don't have something, just ask and we'll try--we like challenges. New packages: AzPainter 2.1.0, Pale Moon 27.4.2, Liquorix kernel 4.12-6, mpv 0.26.0, Kodi 17.3, 0ad 0.0.22, Mesa 13.0.6
User avatar
stevepusser
 
Posts: 8684
Joined: 2009-10-06 05:53

Re: Debian Squeeze - Backports - where? gone?

Postby mrkapqa » 2017-04-30 10:33

this is one answer i got from a member of debian backports

"Squeeze-Backports got archived together with squeeze and doesn't
receive any updates since a rather long time now already. You really
should finally upgrade to wheezy.

In case this is really no option for you and you are aware that you are
running an unsupported release that doesn't receive any updates anymore,
you can look at http://archive.debian.org/ and use it from there.
Please notice that there are no updates done there, so even outdated
signatures on the Release files won't get updated there anymore."



i tried to access those archives, but there are no packages available. what am i doing wrong?



to me it sounds silly to make an effort to build programs and then after 5 five years to delete it from servers. really strange "upcycling"
mrkapqa
 
Posts: 42
Joined: 2014-04-22 08:30


Re: Debian Squeeze - Backports - where? gone?

Postby dasein » 2017-04-30 13:51

this is one answer i got from a member of debian backports

So now you're bugging the backports team????

In the name of whatever you hold Sacred, would you please stop already???

Let me try to explain this using simple sentences:

    1) The number of developers/maintainers is finite.

    2) Developer attention is also finite. That is to say, a given dev can only focus on one thing at a time.

    3) The number of hours in a day is both finite and fixed.

    4) By implication, developer time spent doing any one thing is also time that is not spent doing anything else. (The fancy name for this is an opportunity cost.)

    5) As of the date of this post, there are 11 "older" versions of Debian that do not receive developer attention/effort/backports/security fixes, etc.
Now, whether you realize it or not, what you are suggesting is that developer time is best spent doing maintenance on these older releases, which range in age from ≈5 years to >20 years.

But here's the thing, and there is just no getting around it: even if the devs decided to implement this Really Bad Idea, the bulk of their maintenance effort would necessarily have to focus on the oldest (and therefore least compatible) releases. So Squeeze would still suffer, because the vast majority of the retrofit effort would go to Buzz, Bo, Hamm, etc.

No matter how frequently or fervently you express your displeasure, at the end of the day, you're still a minority of one. You have two options:

    1) Organize a Debian Zombification Team comprised of people who share your belief, pull the source code for those earlier releases, and start retrofitting. (While you're at it, maybe resurrect CP/M, which hasn't had any love since the 1980s.)

    2) Recognize that software, like everything else in the Universe, has a finite lifespan. Mourn as you feel you must, but embrace this idea and move on with the rest of your life.
User avatar
dasein
 
Posts: 7775
Joined: 2011-03-04 01:06
Location: Terra Incantationum

Next

Return to General Questions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

fashionable