Get Over The Old UIs

I was just looking at another distribution, I won’t name it, but it won’t be hard to narrow it down, if you’re smart, and know a bit about me. 🙂

Anyway, it had the KDE 3.5X series desktop environment as default. I thought, cool! I’ll like this probably. Then I paused. You all should know that pause, right? It’s the one where our mind is actually being rational for a minute and starts spinning trying to figure something out. Then it’s almost as if a bell gets rung once and the answer’s there. My mind was telling me that it remembered that the last time I looked at a distribution using the KDE 3.5X series I thought it looked antiquated at best.

The distribution I was looking at was built not too long ago either. I have to wonder why they chose that series. I did read that they talk about older systems and such too, so maybe they felt it was a better fit. Who knows.

What I do know, it’s time to give up on a lot of the interfaces. I’m quite sure when GNOME’s shell has been around for a few years, someone will look back at the 2.30+ Series and think that it looks really dated.

I’m not saying that I like any of the new interfaces that have been created, because when it comes down the to truth of the matter, I don’t. What I am saying is this, it’s time to move forward people. You all complain that this community is run by hardcore nerds that live on the command line. Well here’s one that’s telling you that you’re the ones holding it back if you want it to look like something a decade old.

Keep your stick on the ice…

Landor

Posted in GNU/Linux, Opinion | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Weekend Wrap-up

Not getting it

What’s with this community and people actually not getting it, seriously? I’ve read articles/blog posts from prominent figures in this community for weeks now and they either just don’t understand a lot, or they’re purposely writing these comments.

What am I talking about? Everything! Most important is about all the stuff written about KDE, GNOME. Even the lead developer of Sabayon doesn’t understand that GNOME 3 is obviously targeted at the mobile market! Don’t believe me that is it? Here’s a little 20/20 vision, also known as hindsight. KDE was on the leading edge of this area a couple years ago. We didn’t hear anything about the mobile markets, it was all pretty quiet of course. For good reason, think QT, and if you think that, your next association has to be Nokia. Starting to figure it out? Now what do we see a lot of on any KDE related blog? How this, or that is great for mobile applications. Of course KDE 4 was designed with the mobile market in mind. So is GNOME 3 shell, seriously. I have no doubt, and feel free to come back later to tell me I’m wrong, but you’ll be saying I was right instead, that in the not too far off future we’ll be hearing about GNOME 3 this mobile, and GNOME 3 that mobile. They just don’t want to let it out just yet, the same as the KDE developers didn’t at the start. It’s like cloud computing was, they’re all into the new hype and driving towards it as fast as possible.

LMDE

When Clem of Mint decided to create a Debian based version of Mint I smiled. First because I figured he’d try to move away from Ubuntu more sooner than later. The second was the fact that the community isn’t very skilled is my guess. How would Clem make it work for all of those people that can’t deal with something breaking, or needing a bit of extra input, from Debian Testing. We got that answer this week. 🙂

Clem, and others of the Mint community like to call Debian Testing a rolling release, it is only to a point. That’s why early adopters of LMDE will feel two lulls with pretty well no updates in this rolling release as they’re calling it. But that’s supposed to be the appeal, a rolling release, and ‘getting under the hood’ (that one always makes me smile when people type it). So what does Clem do? He kind of stops it from being a rolling release, and sets it up to hold the community’s hand by making his own repository and issuing monthly updates if I read properly. That kind of retracts from the whole rolling release theory, no? Let’s say Debian Testing gets updates for about 18 months, that’s 18 sets of updates only. Actually less with this release of course. It’s still rolling release, but it sure doesn’t sound like it when you break it down to 18 or less sets of updates, no?

Also, I was smiling about something else I read. Very few switched over, or use LMDE in comparison to the Ubuntu based version of Mint. That tells me two things, first the community might not have the skills to switch, or they believe they dont (Debian is simple people!). Second, the reason they like Mint is because it’s a pumped up kiddie version of Ubuntu. They get all the codecs and stuff installed for them instantly. That’s the only reason they’re there pretty well. Let’s face it, if Ubuntu offered the same thing, who would have switched? For that matter, would Clem even had reason to create Mint in the first place.

That makes me think though, Clem’s done well at promoting Mint to the point where it pays his way, but can he keep it up? He’s bitten off a lot here. Can he keep the majority happy with Ubuntu, even with the fact that the GNOME 2 series is going to be dropped, and still keep his LMDE base happy, while trying to work it so everyone switches over and he can drop one.

Clem wanting to drop Ubuntu is pure speculation, nothing more, I just wanted to clarify that.

Anyway, I guess time will tell. I’m only slightly curious to see what will happen in the future. It’s funny though, rolling release. 🙂

Fedora remasters

This one is quick. Why does anyone seriously use a Fedora remaster from Fedora 14? In fact, why would a developer of the remaster keep working on it when it only has 6 months support left? I only know of one other person who’s echoed the same thoughts. Really, isn’t it a waste? Can’t they at least follow the new release development cycle and release not long after Fedora does?

Isn’t it bad enough it pretty well is only supported for about a year?

Linux and Android

I’ve been noticing more and more that people are using the term Android/Linux, or Linux/Android. While I agree with it completely, didn’t Linus Torvalds himself refuse to call Linux GNU/Linux, then not long ago showed that he was unhappy with Google for not calling Android Linux/Android, or Android/Linux?

It’s usually the one that’s not as popular and in the limelight wanting to get credit when credit is due, and usually the one soaking up all the attention that doesn’t care about the first one getting their credit too.

Let’s just hope that those involved take the time out to give people the credit for their work as they rightly deserve, it’s only fair.

What I’ve got going on

I’m currently testing out a number of Firefox releases, from their stable release up.

Also, I’m working with gNewSense 3.0, codenamed: Parkes. I haven’t found any problems with it really. It’s based on Debian Stable so you can expect it to run the way it’s supposed to. Oh, that reminds me, I need to ask them what the new background image reprepsents. It might even be a new logo altogether.

Keep your stick on the ice…

Landor

Posted in GNU/Linux, Opinion | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

HowTo: Debian Apt Pinning And Upgrading To Other Branches

Recently I’ve been quite busy on a number of side projects. While working on one of the projects I was helping someone else understand it. That led me to trying to explain pinning.

Pinning is extremely simple and needed for different branches of a project, or using other repositories. Let’s say you have Debian Stable installed and want to use the just released Firefox 5 (Iceweasel 5), you can. You would setup pinning to help control your repositories. That’s another benefit of pinning, you easily control what gets installed from what repositories, thus you’re able to have more repositories listed in your sources.list file without the worry of one superseding the other.

Hopefully the example to follow will explain a bit better than I can here.

First let’s setup our sources.list file to point at all of Debian’s branches, experimental, unstable, testing, stable.

deb http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/ stable main
deb-src http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/ stable main

deb http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/ testing main
deb-src http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/ testing main

deb http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/ unstable main
deb-src http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/ unstable

deb http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/ experimental main
deb-src http://ftp.ca.debian.org/debian/ experimental main

(Note: This is just an example as the above mirrors are located in Canada. Change them accordingly as needed. Also, since this is to give a basic understanding I left out some other important mirrors, updates, etc.)

Now that we’ve got those setup we need to do a bit of tweaking to apt since it has a cache limit. What that means is that the more repositories you add the closer you get to reaching that limit and making apt pout and quit. Also, as a recommendation, with any Debian based system I would add at least one more repository entry for each branch as a fallback. I’d actually add two or three more. That increases apt’s cache as you’d guess. Just some advice, and another reason why setting the cache is important.

Point your favourite editor to /etc/apt/apt.conf and open the file, or create it if it doesn’t already exist.

Now add this to the file: APT::Cache-Limit “80000000”;

Then save the file and exit the editor.

If you ever have a problem with too many repositories just increase the cache limit.

It’s time to setup pinning.

Point your favourite editor to /etc/apt/preferences and open the file, or create it if it doesn’t already exist.

Now add this to the file:

Package: *
Pin: release a=stable
Pin-Priority: 700

Package: *
Pin: release a=testing
Pin-Priority: 600

Package: *
Pin: release a=unstable
Pin-Priority: 550

Package: *
Pin: release a=experimental
Pin-Priority: 500

Then save and exit, and update with: apt-get update

What the above does is gives you total control over the repositories. Debian Stable takes priority since it has the highest value of 700, then Testing, Unstable, and Experimental.

You could easily change it around to using Unstable as your main system and have Testing and Stable pinned for any needed dependencies, or any extra stable packages with security updates if needed.

Also, another explanation is needed here. The first line for each entry is packages. The asterisk lets apt know that it’s for all packages. You can have it set to install any single package (or group of packages) with the package name. Since I know all of you are extreme command line users I’m sure you’ll want the latest version of moon-buggy installed. To do this you would just put the package name there.

Here’s the example:

Package: moon-buggy
Pin: release a=unstable
Pin-Priority: 550

To install packages from the pinned repositories just use this command:

apt-get -t unstable install moon-buggy

As I’ve said earlier, you could use this to install unstable by setting unstable to have the highest pin priority then testing after it, and finally stable.

Here’s my recommended way to upgrade to unstable from either stable or testing, after setting up the proper pinning priority of course.

Issue these commands in a terminal:

apt-get update
apt-get upgrade
apt-get dist-upgrade
apt-get clean
apt-get autoclean
apt-get autoremove

You might wonder why I say to run upgrade before dist-upgrade, or even at all. The answer is easy, and a preference. Various times you can run a dist-upgrade and have absolutely no problems. Other times it can be full of broken packages. I believe that running apt-get upgrade first lessens the likelyhood of that happening. That’s just opinion though.

Also on that note, upgrade from the most basic install possible if you can. Even better, do it from a clean install. Get your hands on a Debian testing CD and install only the base system. Then make the appropriate changes to your repositories, and setup pinning. Once this is done run the above commands to upgrade to unstable. After that you can run tasksel on the command line and install any package groups as needed, for example, desktop. That’s the cleanest way I know to make the switch, and the only way I’d recommend to.

Hope that helps someone. Any questions at all feel free to ask them in the comments below.

Keep your stick on the ice…

Landor

Posted in GNU/Linux, Howtos | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

There Should Be Only One Distribution!

I often read about there being yet another distribution, how they’re not needed, and of course, based on Ubuntu. At DistroWatch.com people have even told Ladislav Bodnar the site’s creator/owner that he shouldn’t allow all of these derivatives and have a stricter criteria for distributions listed at his site, on the waiting list or not. The last part I personally find insulting of people, telling someone how to do something that they pretty well pioneered that nobody had ever done on such a level before.

There’s a couple different groups of people that usually talk about this. What’s the first group’s biggest and pretty well only reason for this  belief of too many distributions in our community? ‘It confuses new converts from other operating systems.’

What a pile of crap eh?

What the person is really saying is, they don’t like the distribution, or maybe just Ubuntu and its popularity, and want to be vocal about it. Know what I do when I don’t like something? I don’t use it. There’s a whole pile of stuff in our community that I don’t like, and I rarely, if ever, talk about it. I don’t believe in using Adobe’s Flash, I could go on and on about it when people bring it up, I don’t. I do my thing and move on. Not so with the type of person I mentioned, they’ll bring it up about each and every new derivative of almost every distribution.

Here’s the funny part too, if they like some derivative of a specific distribution that they already like then it’s perfectly fine.

Let’s speak about the other group, the smaller group that feels we really do have too many distributions and actually makes an attempt at explaining why they believe having fewer  would be better. They will tell you a number of reasons, all fairly sound from the onset, until you start to discuss them. Here’s the majority of the reasons:

  • The same as the first group, it makes it confusing for new users.
  • With too many distributions the larger distributions lose out on having an even larger community which will draw more people from that community as contributors in some fashion.
  • Similar to the last one, a larger community means that OEMs will take notice and seriously consider shipping their systems with one of the distributions installed on them.
  • The final reason is also similar, but only barely. If there were fewer distributions hardware manufacturers wouldn’t find it as confusing and would more readily consider building and packaging drivers for the community.

The first one is easy to deal with. As I’ve stated in another blog post if a new user is competent enough to even know about alternative operating systems, let alone able to install them, then I’m sure the number of distributions, and what specific category they represent will be more than understandable to them. I can’t repeat that simple concept enough.

Let’s use Slackware for the second one since it’s the oldest active distribution. If numbers increased contributors/developers then I’d imagine Slackware would be overflowing with developers after all these years. I wouldn’t even want to guess at a ratio of users turned contributors, as opposed to those that remained as just users. I’m sure the number is fairly low though. Also, you’ll find that most people that contribute have intended to from the onset. Not all of course, but most. A lot of them being students, or people already working in the field.

With the third it’s true to a degree only, then it stops being valid. Large OEMs do notice main distributions, they will ship their systems with a distribution installed. They will barely, if at all, advertise them though. Also, it will usually be some enterprise based system. We’ve all heard that OEMs have agreements to ship other operating systems, most are not about to break that agreement. They also look at markets. If we have one thousand distributions, or just one, it doesn’t make any difference, we still have the same amount of people using it.

The fourth, well. Drivers get built for the kernel. A hardware manufacturer doesn’t have to deal with a multitude of distributions to build their driver for the kernel. There’s not a lot to say about this, it’s all done at one place, for one thing, the kernel. Then the packaging format is fairly simple, we’ve had one standard package format for a very long time, it’s called a tarball. If someone doesn’t know how to build from source, then I’m quite sure an actual contributor to the project does, and most likely has built the package into a binary format compatible to that distribution. No, drivers and packaging are not an issue at all.

Instead of giving reasons on why we shouldn’t have so many distributions, we should be saying the exact opposite! We need more distributions. We need more derivatives.

Why? Easy, it’s what makes the community tick, and I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t find a lot of distributions useful, nor needed. They do an important thing though, they add. Adding is very important to this community. When you add in another distribution you’re ensuring that the community has grown yet again. You’re seeing the work of another person to actually be able to figure out how to put it together. Even if they used some remaster script/tool, they got there, and they did it. How much you want to bet some of that spins off to other people? Or how much you want to bet they end up conferring with other projects/groups within the community? I wrote a review here about Crunchbang, I didn’t mention that they had an individual in their forums who took what he learned from the questions asked in the forums there to help them create Archbang. From a desire to build an Openbox derivative started with Ubuntu (that later became based on Debian), it helped inspire another distribution to be a derivative of Arch. Amazing no?

There’s more than enough reasons to explain why more options is better. I’ll list some of them:

  • Diversity improves upon the base.
  • More choices simply gives you more choices. That’s not redundant if you actually open your mind to it.
  • You’re not locked in.
  • Cultural needs can be met easily.
  • Ideas can be explored.

I leave the list there, but the last one was the most important in my opinion, ‘Ideas can be explored’. When you’re part of a specific project you have specific goals, road maps, specific dates to do all these things. It’s quite ordered. Also, you have to work within the project. How many people didn’t like the position of the buttons on the windows in Ubuntu? They’re still there too, aren’t they? That’s a key issue here. Even if a project had the next major leader (though unknown) in our community contributing to that project and working hard in their own spare time to develop the next greatest innovation, the project could very easily never accept it for its own reasons. Where would that person, their amazing idea(s), and this community be if the rule was, ‘no extra distributions, period’? Ideas are important, very important. Limit growth and you limit everyone’s options. Simple.

One other thing I’d like to point out, while we view the amount of distributions confusing, how many different cars, trucks, and vans are there in the world’s markets? Think about that, because that’s the reality here, ‘the world market’. You’re not just looking at our community from your own country, it spans the world. A lot of people don’t really grasp that aspect of it all, they’ll believe they do, but they don’t really, it’s world-wide.

Again, I may not like some of the distributions and wonder why they’ve been created. Someone else might like them though, and understand why they were developed. I know I’ve found a number of features from other distributions that I’ve either used or expanded on for my own personal builds and testing out ideas I’ve had.

So, I’m glad all the eggs are not in one basket.

Keep your stick on the ice…

Landor

Posted in GNU/Linux, Opinion | Tagged , | 8 Comments

Ubuntu Slaps Its Users In The Face

Or does it?

I just read an article written by Graham Morrison over at techradar.com about Ubuntu and Unity. I’m not going to go into a ton of details since I’m going to actually write a super short post for once!

Graham basically discusses how Ubuntu is trying to create its own brand and it really should be a discussion about developing Unity over Gnome, and its choice to develop it more than any truly in-depth discussion surrounding Ubuntu wanting to be its own brand, which has been more than obvious for a number of years now to anyone who’s been watching closely.

There’s a couple points that I want to make that everyone seems to be missing who blogs/discusses/writes about this topic time and time again.

First is Gnome 3. People have been using Ubuntu for a very long time. Its user-base is more than cemented to the Gnome 2 style desktop. People have been talking about Ubuntu not caring about its users, but there’s exactly two options for Ubuntu, develop their own shell, or use the Gnome 3 shell. The users would be affected by the change either way. Software development continues no matter how many people feel comfortable with one look. So, in essence, Graham made the same error everyone else has, to make Ubuntu the blame for an upstream development that would have caused a massive change regardless.

Second, everyone talks about this bad relationship Ubuntu has with Gnome. This I personally find amusing. If Ubuntu has upset Gnome, and the Gnome foundation so much, why do they accept financial support for them? Canonical sits on the Gnome Advisory Board because they support (donate money to) Gnome. This position allows them to help ‘guide’ the Directors of the Gnome Foundation in the overall direction of Gnome and the Gnome Foundation. Doesn’t sound like there’s a lot of bad feelings there, or neither of the two would be together is my guess.

Keep your stick on the ice…

Landor

Posted in GNU/Linux, Opinion | Tagged , , , | 8 Comments