Upcoming Release of Debian GNU/Linux 4.0

Message

Lavene · #1 Post by **Lavene** » 2006-07-25 06:48

http://www.us.debian.org/News/2006/20060724

Tina

ajdlinux · #2 Post by **ajdlinux** » 2006-07-25 07:05

Great! IMHO it should be called maybe 10.0 or 12.0 or something like that, it's that much better than Sarge. Sarge should have been 4.0 anyway, it's very different from Woody.

DeanLinkous · #3 Post by **DeanLinkous** » 2006-07-25 15:32

I do agree sarge should of been 4 and etch should jump to 5. I realize it is just a numbers game and I personally would be fine with point changes but people want to see big numbers which mirror big changes and improvements and linux has certainly improved and so has debian!

I wonder if they will hit that date but as long as it is int he ballpark I wil be a VERY impressed and VERY happy person!

Burnside · #4 Post by **Burnside** » 2006-07-25 19:08

That's good to see. I made the switch to 'Etch' from Mepis 6.0 and it's... just really nice. I'm kicking myself for not downloading the netinst months ago.

SpEcIeS · #5 Post by **SpEcIeS** » 2006-07-30 03:44

It is good to see Debian moving again. Debian based distros run very well, being a previous Ubuntu user, and this distro has been around since the beginning.

I enjoy running etch/unstable combo. Will be nice to see an official release. However, I disagree with high numbers. Keep them low and changes/stability big. Numbers are just numbers.

Debian has been around longer than SuSE, a slackware spawn, and they are at 10.1 (10.2 alpha).

Nice work Debian souls.

hellfire[bg] · #6 Post by **hellfire[bg]** » 2006-08-01 14:06

Debian has been around longer than SuSE, a slackware spawn, and they are at 10.1 (10.2 alpha).

Yeah but what debian lacks in numbers makes up for in quality.

Lavene · #7 Post by **Lavene** » 2006-08-01 14:47

hellfire[bg] wrote:
Debian has been around longer than SuSE, a slackware spawn, and they are at 10.1 (10.2 alpha).
Yeah but what debian lacks in numbers makes up for in quality.

High numers doesen't mean much... Windows is way past 2000 and still people complain!

Tina

SpEcIeS · #8 Post by **SpEcIeS** » 2006-08-01 14:50

No kidding.

Grifter · #9 Post by **Grifter** » 2006-08-01 18:21

back when debian was 2.2 i always assumed the debian version number followed the kernel (2.2 at the time), i was sad when 3.0 came out, it should have been 2.4, and etch 2.6 :(

jjmac · #10 Post by **jjmac** » 2006-08-05 11:20

Big numbers (grin) ....

Thats all just in you heads, big numbers and swift marketing types ... who needs it.

As official 64 bit support is included, well, that is worthy of a major increment ... but bigger numbers don't make bigger/better systems, more so the opposite

Let all the other distros go down the Mercurial Ms road and leave deb to Unix ... i recon .

Glad to see the kernel update too. I think people tend to limit themselves in that respect, to often. I often update my kernel. Vanilla with the ck patch, run udev ... never any problems. My desktop would never be as responsive other wise.

gcc4 -- aren't there a few performance issues with that. It's a damn hassle trying to backport src written for gcc4 to gcc335, thats for sure (libc6).

But, looking forward to etch

jm