The much-anticipated
Ubuntu 4.10 release
happened on October 20. There are a number of interesting things
about Ubuntu, including its commercial backing, use of "4.10" as its
initial release number, and its
desire to change
the world through provocative artwork. But the most interesting thing,
perhaps, is the amount of attention that Ubuntu has received. New
distributions are not exactly an unusual thing; why all the excitement
about Ubuntu?
The money behind Ubuntu is certainly one reason; new distributions may pop
up every week, but few of them have a reported 40 paid developers behind
them. When a new distribution has that sort of backing, people have a
reason to assume that there is something interesting going on, and that it
may stay around for a while.
The quality of the hackers that Ubuntu was able to attract is also clearly
a factor. Ubuntu employs a number of well-known developers from the GNOME,
FreeDesktop.org, and Debian communities, among others. When top-quality
developers get together behind a new project, interesting things tend to
happen.
Ubuntu also makes promises which resonate with a great many users. A
quick, single-CD installation process backed up by a huge network-based
package repository. A strong emphasis on the best desktop experience that
Linux can offer. Bleeding-edge packages combined with a promise of free
support for 18 months. A promise of a six-month release cycle backed up by
some of the developers who lived up to that promise with the GNOME
project. A general sort of cool buzz.
Those are all good reasons for Ubuntu to succeed, but there may be
something else going on here. Ubuntu may have found a way to become the
preferred interface between users and the Debian project.
Debian has a lot of appeal. It is an excruciatingly free distribution
characterized by a widely recognized technical excellence. It offers a
variety of packages which is second to none and a package management system
which is unequaled elsewhere. But Debian scares away a number of
potential users. Its "stable" release is painfully out of date most of the
time, the "unstable" release is rather too bleeding-edge for many users
(while still being slow to pick up new releases at times), and the
middle-of-the-road "testing" release seems to offer the worst of both
"stable" and "unstable." The process of creating a new stable release
looks chaotic, with no timeline for an actual release in sight. The
community seems to spend rather too much time arguing about the free status
of firmware and documentation and packaging up obscure tools and too little
time simply creating a current distribution with a broader appeal. Debian
is a great institution, but it worries a number of people.
Ubuntu is the promise of all the good things about Debian without many of
the problems. As a stabilized version of Debian sid, it has a remarkably
current set of packages. For some software (e.g. GNOME 2.8) Ubuntu was, by
design, ahead of everybody else. The release cycle is well defined, and
the support period has been made clear from the beginning. There is the
obligatory friendly installer as well. Ubuntu looks
like a Debian which stays current, and which is safe for ordinary people to
use.
Ubuntu is certainly not the first company which has made a go at being a
more civilized Debian distribution; others include Progeny, Linspire,
Lycoris, UserLinux, and even Corel's old offering. Ubuntu looks rather
more community-oriented than many of the other commercial, Debian-based
distributions, however; Linspire may be good at attracting attention and
lawsuits, but few people would consider it to be truly open or part of the
community. Appearances matter, and Ubuntu appears to have the right people
and attitude.
Interestingly, Ubuntu appears to have made a bigger splash than even
UserLinux, which is arguably a more community-oriented, Debian-based
distribution. The UserLinux project is clearly well aware of Ubuntu, to
the point of adding an entry to the UserLinux FAQ on
the differences between the two distributions:
A key difference is UbuntuLinux is a (free) product offering from a single
commercial entity (Canonical Ltd.) whereas UserLinux is created through a
community development model.
UserLinux aims to create a standard core for ISV's/whomever to
support. This includes very little real packaging of custom software beyond
pieces to 'brand' the system. Most of the system is packaged upstream and
maintained upstream. Ubuntu aims to create a Debian based desktop
distribution and contains a very large number of custom packages. For
example, Debian Sarge ships with GNOME 2.6 while Ubuntu is forked off of
Unstable around the same time that Sarge did, but ships GNOME 2.8 with
significant modifications.
For the purposes of public image in mid-October, 2004, one might state the
Ubuntu has added a significant amount of value (or at least changes) to
Debian, and has a stable release out now. UserLinux looks to be mostly a
rebranding effort with no releases available yet. From that viewpoint,
it's not surprising that Ubuntu is currently hogging the spotlight. That
situation could change as UserLinux pulls its first release together and
gets its distributed support network going.
UserLinux would be well advised to do these things soon.
There is clearly a market for distributors who impose some order upon the
Debian development process. With these distributors in place, the
undisciplined nature of the Debian release process does not matter anywhere
near as much. The emergence of successful, value-added, Debian-based
distributions may be one of the best things to happen to Debian in some
time.
Comments (36 posted)
Peer-to-peer (P2P) technologies have been continually vilified, not to
mention legally challenged, by the entertainment industry and other groups
as a haven for anonymously sharing digital content illegally. The
LionShare project seeks to
legitimize P2P as an academic resource by doing away with
anonymous file-sharing and adding features appropriate to an educational
environment. LionShare is in development at Penn State University thanks to
a grant from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. To get up to speed on
LionShare, we talked with four members of the LionShare team, project
leader Mike Halm and LionShare developers Alex Valentine, Lorin Metzger and
Derek Morr.
The major influence for the LionShare project was the Visual Image User
Study (VIUS) that was completed last
September. LionShare came from a proof-of-concept prototype developed
during work on VIUS. The project now has a $1.1 million grant from the
Andrew W. Mellon Foundation to develop LionShare 1.0. The grant started
last year on October 1, and the team plans to have the 1.0 release ready by
September 30, 2005. The first public release alpha went live at the end of
September.
LionShare differs from traditional P2P networks in a number of ways. First
and foremost, LionShare is designed to be a private, secure
network. LionShare users will communicate with "PeerServers" to provide
file sharing even when users are not online and for centralized
management. The PeerServers will allow users to make files available to
others authorized to retrieve the files, or even just as a backup of local
files they wish to have available from multiple locations. Morr did note
that the software will feature user quotas, to ensure that users do not
abuse the backup features.
The software will also feature collaboration tools, such as P2P chat, not
present in some file sharing utilities. Authentication will not be required
for a user to search the network, but authentication will be necessary to
actually retrieve or share files. The LionShare white paper also calls for
the LionShare client to provide organizational features as well as search
and retrieval capability already present in clients like LimeWire. The
LionShare will allow users to search their own filesystems, though Morr
pointed out that LionShare's organizational features are not as
comprehensive as tools like Beagle or Apple's
SpotLight.
At this point, however, LionShare's codebase is still in an alpha
state. Morr said that the current alpha that's available on the website is
missing the security components that will set LionShare apart from other
P2P networks. Metzger noted that the next release should have the security
integration, though the release will still be an alpha release.
LionShare is based on the LimeWire 4.0
codebase using a modified Gnutella protocol, and is entirely written in
Java. The client and server software are available under the GNU General
Public License, while the SASL-CA software is under a BSD-type
license. At this point, the LionShare team said that there are "some
discussions here and there" between the LionShare developers and the
LimeWire developers, but not a "concrete, everyday
partnership," but that the LimeWire developers are pleased to see
their codebase being used in other projects.
Since the LionShare source code is available, how will the developers
ensure that others aren't able to utilize the source to build anonymous
LionShare client software? According to Morr, it wouldn't matter if someone
were to tamper with the client software. "In order to get any kind of
public file, you have to certify or authenticate...the other end wouldn't
authorize you to access the file."
In addition to requiring authentication, LionShare is designed to allow
file restriction based on identity or user roles. Users will be able to set
Access Control Lists (ACLs) to restrict sharing of a file to individual
users, groups or to all authenticated members. Morr said that the
attributes will come from the authentication servers, so that the
institutions running LionShare servers will be able to fine-tune the
criteria for file sharing. One potential hurdle for educational
institutions looking to join a LionShare network is the lack of a
standardized schema for ACLs. Morr acknowledged that each institution was
likely to have its own schema at the moment, that wouldn't be compatible
with other institutions. However, a standardized LDAP schema for higher
education called eduPerson
is being developed by Internet2, a partner organization for LionShare.
Morr also pointed out that LionShare was designed to allow users to
authenticate against a number of different sources. He said that the
project was doing a lot of work to make LionShare work with "whatever
authentication you have," including LDAP directories and Kerberos
sources. Morr said that LionShare should be compatible with Microsoft's
Active Directory as well, though they haven't tested that as of yet.
We also asked whether LionShare would protect authorized users from
accidentally sharing sensitive or personal files with the wrong set of
users. For example, could LionShare prevent a user from accidentally
sharing all of their files with all authenticated LionShare users? The
LionShare developers said that they had thought about this, and would try
to solve the problem with by having "a good UI" that would let
users know that they were sharing files.
Whether LionShare will catch on beyond the academic setting is anyone's
guess. There are valid reasons for integrating authentication into P2P for
academic or business uses, but that approach will become unwieldy for
larger P2P uses such as downloading Linux ISOs. We'll be watching the
development of LionShare with interest, and are looking forward to further
releases to evaluate how useful the project will be in the long run.
Comments (none posted)
By many (but not all) accounts, the Linux desktop has achieved something
close to parity with some of the proprietary alternatives, in terms of both
capability and usability. The desktop developers are certainly not ready
to declare victory and sit back, however; the pace of development is, if
anything, still increasing. As an example of where things are going, we
decided to take a quick look at a couple of bleeding-edge applications
which have been attracting attention recently.
The first of these is tomboy, a simple desktop
note-taking tool. Tomboy implements a set of note cards, each of which
contains text and links to other cards. The idea is not particularly new,
but the implementation has been thought out well. Some of the best ideas
from Wiki-style web sites have been absorbed - typing a WikiWord into a
note creates and links to a new note using that word as its title. Links
can also be created through a "link" button or by dragging and dropping. A
simple search capability can quickly find notes containing a given string.
Nat Friedman was
impressed by this application:
Note taking is something I do all the time, and which previously
was the realm of "emacs ~/randomname.txt" for me.... We all had
our horrible little solutions to this problem, and Tomboy has
stepped in to fill the gap in a big way.
I'm not sure it's clear to everyone just how big a space Tomboy has
carved out. If Tomboy can own note taking for me, that's one of
the main purposes of my computer.
Your editor was, with some effort, able to get tomboy running on a Debian
unstable system; this application requires a number of highly-current Mono
and GTK libraries. There are some rough edges and missing capabilities,
which should come as little surprise for an application this new. Even so,
tomboy makes note taking and organization into a quick and easy task; it is
good at staying out of the way. If the current trend continues, tomboy
should quickly reach a level of functionality and stability that will earn
it a place on most distribution disks.
Meanwhile, quite a bit of attention has recently been focused on beagle, which is currently
at a lofty 0.0.2 release. Beagle appears to be the GNOME project's answer
to Microsoft's search plans and Google's (Windows) offering; it provides a
quick way to find things on the desktop. Think of it as a modern version
of locate, but with a few enhancements.
One core beagle feature is its collection of "filters," which enable
searches of a wide variety of files typically found on a Linux desktop
system - and some that aren't. Supported file types include Microsoft
Office, OpenOffice.org, PDF, source code in a number of programming languages,
and a number of image and audio file formats (only metadata is indexed).
Beagle can also search email (mostly limited to evolution users for now),
tomboy notes, weblog entries in the "Blam!" format, application launchers,
and more.
Underneath it all, beagle uses the (still unmerged) inotify mechanism to learn about
changes to the filesystem. New or modified files can be indexed
immediately; there should be no need for a massive "thrash the disk" job
running in the middle of the night. As an added touch, search results
which are currently displayed for the user are updated to reflect the latest
filesystem changes.
There is a command-line search tool which may be used to search beagle, but
the primary interface to the system is best ("bleeding-edge search
tool"). The project has put together a
collection of best screenshots which gives a good idea of what beagle
can currently do.
While tomboy is primarily the work of one developer (Alex Graveley), beagle
is a rather larger affair. The beagle
roadmap posted on October 4 shows that quite a few Novell hackers
have been set to work on beagle. At the top of their list is basic
usability work, things like "Not crashing or failing, most of the
time." Among other things, it seems there are memory leak problems
in Mono which have to be worked around. Email integration remains on the
list ("The primary goal will be Evolution mail integration; patches
for other mail clients will, of course, be accepted."). Work
continues on the search interface; among other things, search will be
integrated into the GNOME file selection dialog.
Longer-term goals include reworking dashboard to sit on top of beagle,
adding beagle searches to nautilus,
and, somehow, better encapsulating the relationships between desktop
objects.
Beagle is very much an early-stage project; it can be difficult to install,
and it is not available in packaged form for most distributions. There is
also that "not crashing for failing" issue. But it has reached a point
where the suicidally early adopters are finding it useful, and progress is
happening quickly. Linux, it seems, will not be left behind when it comes
to desktop search capabilities.
Comments (20 posted)
Page editor: Jonathan Corbet
Inside this week's LWN.net Weekly Edition
- Security: How to kill a web browser; New vulnerabilities in cvs, ghostscript, mod_ssl, phpMyAdmin, PostgreSQL, ...
- Kernel: Coming in 2.6.10; Realtime preemption part 2; MODULE_PARM()
- Distributions: New Linux Firewall Releases: IPCop 1.4.0 and Devil-Linux 1.2; Ubuntu 4.10; OpenPKG 2.2; Aurora Build-1.92; Devil-Linux v1.2
- Development: Transcode - The video transcoder to rule them all, new versions of
Montag, BusyBox, NetworkManager, Albatross, mnoGoSearch, GNOME Schedule,
Metacity, FLTK, Wine, Evolution, Epiphany, Seahorse, iCompile.
- Press: Stallman on Software Idea Patents,
Intellectual Property action committee, Clayton Christensen's advice
to Microsoft, Gartner warms to open-source, Martin Taylor interview,
Embedded Linux intro, PHP 5 review, Agenda Setters 2004.
- Announcements: SGI to open-source SpeedShop, Firefox in NY Times,
proposed World Intellectual Wealth Organisation,
NoSoftwarePatents.com, KDE turns eight.
- Letters: Linux-installed systems and piracy.
Next page:
Security>>