[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: debian 8



On Fri, 3 Apr 2015 13:08:29 +0300
Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> wrote:

>  Hi.
> 
> On Fri, Apr 03, 2015 at 11:49:30AM +0200, Petter Adsen wrote:
> > On Fri, 3 Apr 2015 17:41:44 +0800
> > Bret Busby <bret.busby@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On 03/04/2015, Pol Hallen wrote:
> > > > I read that at 25 april
> > > > (https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2015/03/msg00016.html)
> > > > should be available latest debian version.
> > > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > What are the expected differences between Debian 7 and Debian 8?
> > 
> > https://www.debian.org/releases/wheezy/ppc64el/release-notes/ch-whats-new.en.html
> 
> There's something I miss here. Why does your link contains *wheezy*,
> instead of *jessie*? Also, why *ppc64el*? It's hardly a commodity
> architecture.

No idea, the top of the page says: "Chapter 2. What's new in Debian 8"

I'm sorry I didn't see the link, I simply went to debian.org and
searched for "jessie gnome classic", which returned this:

https://search.debian.org/cgi-bin/omega?DB=en&P=jessie+gnome+classic

The top link there says, again: "Chapter 2. What's new in Debian 8", so
I expected that to be what I wanted. Mea culpa.

> > > Will Debian 8, when released, provide the "GNOME Classic"
> > > interface?
> > 
> > From the above:
> > 
> > "If you want to keep an interface closer to the GNOME 2.30 version
> > in wheezy, you can select the “GNOME Classic” session at the login
> > prompt. It will bring you an improved version of the traditional
> > panel. You can still edit the panel to add more applets, by using
> > the hidden alt+right click combination. "
> 
> Um, wheezy has GNOME 3.4. It's squeeze which had GNOME 2.30.
> Apparently this info is outdated.

I don't use Gnome, so I wouldn't know :) As the top of the page said
"Debian 8", I didn't inspect the link any closer.

Again, my bad.

Petter

-- 
"I'm ionized"
"Are you sure?"
"I'm positive."

Attachment: pgpGt3dGH7KNX.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: