Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Debian 7.0 "Wheezy" released

debian.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 132 posts

Re: Debian 7.0 "Wheezy" released

#11

Post by verroq »

oinksoft wrote: post #5
karlmdavis wrote: post #4

> This release includes numerous updated software packages, such as: > Linux 3.2 For anyone else wondering, Ubuntu 13.04 has the 3.8 kernel and 12.04.2 has the 3.5 kernel ( https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/LTSEnablementStack ).

For anyone else wondering, RHEL 6.4 has the 2.6.32-358 kernel. Zenwalk 7.2 has the 3.2.5 kernel. What's the point of citing the kernel shipped with another distro here?

Shows how unbearably slow Debian's release cycle is. Wheezy ships with all the latest packages from 2 years ago.

Re: Debian 7.0 "Wheezy" released

#12

Post by oinksoft »

will1000 wrote: post #9
oinksoft wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For anyone else wondering, RHEL 6.4 has the 2.6.32-358 kernel. Zenwalk 7.2 has the 3.2.5 kernel. What's the point of citing the kernel shipped with another distro here?

I was under the impression that a newer kernel ment more hardware support. Am I wrong?

Of course.

The tone of the top-level comment, I think, is "woah, Debian, you call this kernel updated?"

Rock-solid distros like RHEL/CentOS and Debian are deliberately conservative. Some folks don't like that.

Re: Debian 7.0 "Wheezy" released

#13

Post by eropple »

dsr_ wrote: post #3
pervycreeper wrote: post #2

Would this be a good time to migrate from Ubuntu?

Certainly. Wheezy is the new "stable", which will get security support for a year past the introduction of the next stable release. It's an excellent choice for servers, and right now it's not a bad desktop release. In another year or so you might want to move to the testing release for a desktop that needs the latest features.

Debian testing won't have "the latest features" a year from now, though. I guess it'll have "later features", but IME desktops really benefit from tracking unstable. Which, as one might expect, is sometimes...unstable. Enter Ubuntu.

There's a pretty good reason to use Debian on servers because of the long support cycles, but on a desktop I feel like most people are going to probably prefer an Ubuntu setup.

Re: Debian 7.0 "Wheezy" released

#15

Post by oinksoft »

verroq wrote: post #11
oinksoft wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For anyone else wondering, RHEL 6.4 has the 2.6.32-358 kernel. Zenwalk 7.2 has the 3.2.5 kernel. What's the point of citing the kernel shipped with another distro here?

Shows how unbearably slow Debian's release cycle is. Wheezy ships with all the latest packages from 2 years ago.

So then run ArchLinux on your servers, and godspeed? Debian is not aimed at having the latest and greatest, but its packages do tend to be more up-to-date than RHEL/CentOS, which is its main competition in the "stable server distro that doesn't get you fired" category.

Re: Debian 7.0 "Wheezy" released

#16

Post by kbar13 »

eropple wrote: post #10
pervycreeper wrote: post #2

Would this be a good time to migrate from Ubuntu?

I'm not, because I find Debian's KVM support to be not what I expect, but if you don't like Ubuntu for whatever reason, it's not a bad time to do it. That said, Debian stable means you'd better be happy with what you have for a very long time unless you want to deal with the often-painful stable->testing or stable->unstable migration. (It can be done, I've done it many times, but expect it to break something.) Person…

and with upstart &co

Re: Debian 7.0 "Wheezy" released

#17

Post by IanChiles »

will1000 wrote: post #9
oinksoft wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For anyone else wondering, RHEL 6.4 has the 2.6.32-358 kernel. Zenwalk 7.2 has the 3.2.5 kernel. What's the point of citing the kernel shipped with another distro here?

I was under the impression that a newer kernel ment more hardware support. Am I wrong?

RHEL often backports hardware support. Their kernel is heavily modified - its not really fair to call it 2.6.xx

Re: Debian 7.0 "Wheezy" released

#18

Post by IanChiles »

jckt wrote: post #6
oinksoft wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For anyone else wondering, RHEL 6.4 has the 2.6.32-358 kernel. Zenwalk 7.2 has the 3.2.5 kernel. What's the point of citing the kernel shipped with another distro here?

It's an interesting fact I suppose. It's interesting to see why certain distros chose certain kernel versions.

Debian has a long release cycle and uses the stablest versions available - and I believe that 3.2 is a "long term support" kernel, like 2.6 - getting large numbers of patches, and stability updates backported.

Re: Debian 7.0 "Wheezy" released

#19

Post by twstws »

verroq wrote: post #11
oinksoft wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For anyone else wondering, RHEL 6.4 has the 2.6.32-358 kernel. Zenwalk 7.2 has the 3.2.5 kernel. What's the point of citing the kernel shipped with another distro here?

Shows how unbearably slow Debian's release cycle is. Wheezy ships with all the latest packages from 2 years ago.

This is silly. Debian also provides rolling releases, testing and unstable. The release cycle is slow only if you ignore the constant development of Debian Sid.

Re: Debian 7.0 "Wheezy" released

#20

Post by oinksoft »

eropple wrote: post #13
dsr_ wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly. Wheezy is the new "stable", which will get security support for a year past the introduction of the next stable release. It's an excellent choice for servers, and right now it's not a bad desktop release. In another year or so you might want to move to the testing release for a desktop that needs the latest features.

Debian testing won't have "the latest features" a year from now, though. I guess it'll have "later features", but IME desktops really benefit from tracking unstable. Which, as one might expect, is sometimes...unstable. Enter Ubuntu. There's a pretty good reason to use Debian on servers because of the long support cycles, but on a desktop I feel like most people are going to probably prefer an Ubuntu setup.

Once, this was a valid comparison (Ubuntu/Sid). Now Ubuntu is a strange beast, a world apart from other distros in goals and just in the basic desktop experience.

aptosid is probably a better choice if you want a more stable Sid these days without the Ubuntu kaleidoscope.

Post reply on HN