CrunchBang Linux Forums - crunchbang 9.10 release

Re: crunchbang 9.10 release

dummy@example.com (MarvinSuggs) — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:41:36 +0000

ledomira wrote:

I really hope the 9.10 release comes soon though.

There won't a 9.10 release as crunchbang is heading in a new direction http://crunchbanglinux.org/forums/topic … ming-soon/

If you really want an Ubuntu based 9.10 Openbox distro then I'd second anonymous' suggestion of madbox. It's an excellent release with all of ADcomps great scripts included. :D

Re: crunchbang 9.10 release

dummy@example.com (anonymous) — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 18:17:47 +0000

You just install regular Ubuntu and then install Openbox on it. Also you can try Madbox:

http://crunchbanglinux.org/forums/topic … usb-toram/

Re: crunchbang 9.10 release

dummy@example.com (ledomira) — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 18:13:09 +0000

I've tried upwards of 20 distros now and #! is my favorite. I really hope the 9.10 release comes soon though. I just bought a new computer and tried out crunchbang on it, but it doesn't recognize my lan and who knows what else. Without being able to connect online with it, it doesn't serve it's purpose for me which was to surf safely and quickly and the reason I switched from windows. I still have it installed on my old computer (this one), but I just tried out Ubuntu live cd on the new pc and the new computer is so much faster that I might just go ahead and install Ubuntu on it. But, if I have the choice, I'd prefer crunchbang. I like crunchbang not only because it's faster, but because it's simpler and actually easier for me to configure and set up the way I want. I like being able to add keyboard shortcuts in the rc.xml file. I like the autostart.sh file that works better than any other way of starting applications on other distros. I like the ease of editing the openbox menu. I like being able to use the panel I want to and not being stuck with the bloated gnome or the difficult to configure lxpanel (I use crunchbang panel, btw). Crunchbang is just better all around. If it supported my new hardware it would be installed on that computer right now and I wouldn't be typing this. Unfortunately, while I put in a lot of effort to learn to do everything needed to run crunchbang originally, I don't yet feel competent enough to do an install with a minimal cd and trying to get an old script to work with a newer Ubuntu version.

Re: crunchbang 9.10 release

dummy@example.com (9812713) — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 14:06:13 +0000

Hi All..

First time poster in the forums, and a 2 week user of Crunchbang. I believe that the crunchbang devs should consider a build-script for each of the versions of ubuntu that is released, this should generally take a bit of strain off the server (as far as bandwidth) and would allow any intermediate user to move to the next ubuntu release without incurring the upgrade woes. I'm not sure what the time requirement might be for something like this. I for one tried to upgrade from 9.04 (fully patched) to 9.10 ... Well as many know that doesn't work seamless. Okay, get rid of GDM for SLiM ... still did not work .. Anyways, then I tried Omns script.... I have to say, I like it, but it's not crunchbang. I am a user who likes lean, I install only what I need. I generally removed 3/4 of the packages from the lite version just to customize.

I think at this point, crunchbang should hang tight until the next LTS.. Whether to move towards a debian core is generally moot and could be up for it's own discussion. Faster booting is one +1 for moving forward, as well as package support. Maybe debian testing is AKA'ed as as the next, continuous rolling OS .. Sadly, my knowledge of customizing the GUI or config files still relies on someone else.. This is why I like crunchbang .... Install, quick conky, tint2 and app customizing, and a had full of PPA's in the source list, and tada, under 2 hours, and I'm back from scratch ...

I also think a +1 for moving forward is bluetooth support. I have to say I'm not a big fan of Pulse Audio, and the fact that debian, and Ubuntu are a bit "fat" but what can you do..

So to sum up ..

+1 debian or ubuntu next version
-1 No build scripts for each version of ubuntu
-1 Bluetooth support
-1 Upgrade options
-1 Updated software support
-/+ faster booting
-/+ Pulse Audio

Cheers.

Re: crunchbang 9.10 release

dummy@example.com (anonymous) — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 16:43:11 +0000

There is no #! 9.10 however since its based on Ubuntu they just do an upgrade (Jaunty to Karmic).

Re: crunchbang 9.10 release

dummy@example.com (axel668) — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 10:08:33 +0000

Zeke wrote:

I've tried to upgrade from CB 9.04 to 9.10 ...

where did you get #! 9.10 ? Using Xubuntu 9.10 since end of december and and actually XFCE is not as bad as "no bullshit" desktop environment as I thought ... sure Xubuntu eats up a little more RAM but with 2Gig I don't really care. #! has better looks, though, so I'm waiting anxiously for #! 9.10 repositories, so that I can switch back to openbox.

BTW 9.10 is booting 15 secs faster than 9.04 (20 secs grub2 to desktop, after a couple of boots), think this alone makes it worth switching.

Re: crunchbang 9.10 release

dummy@example.com (Zeke) — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 09:34:45 +0000

I've tried to upgrade from CB 9.04 to 9.10 and had lots of issues - and 9.04 works perfectly well for me, so no need of newer version. If corenominal decides to go for Debian as a base - keeping grub1, keeping the way of CB - good; if not - 9.04 works fine, and I can wait till 10.04 for next release.
No hurry for me.

Re: crunchbang 9.10 release

dummy@example.com (jollysnowman) — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 15:27:57 +0000

I feel like there's enough support that we could make #! Debian Testing Community Edition. Enough people have done it already that we just have to finalize and streamline the process.

Re: crunchbang 9.10 release

dummy@example.com (Zen:Core) — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 09:33:36 +0000

Just my .02, but it seems like if #! were to move to Debian testing then all it would need to become is a quick "aptitude" command over a base install of Debian and maybe a custom kerenel (which, being a broadcom user would make me love Phil forever). Just imagine though; a system that is set and doesn't need to be overhauled every six months. Simply gorgeous.

I'm frankly tired of six month break..... I mean release cycles. All that excitement to sit in front of my laptop and fix the simplest things? I know it's very pessimistic, but seriously, it's starting to feel like 1 step forward and 2 steps back.

I'm not a hacker or programmer or typical computer nerd, but I've looked at #! as a distro for the above. Though, I'm not afraid to roll the sleeves up and get dirty and change things and play. We've all seen the screenshot every month. Everyone does some sick things with #!. Things I don't always have the time to figure out, but seriously y'all are sick when it comes to this stuff.

What I'm saying is, if Phil moves things to debian testing; does #! need to be a ditro still? Or should it just be a quick install script to get things rolling? If it's Debian after all shouldn't we be able to "aptitude install" our own #!. Maybe changing this distro experience to a "friendlier" Debian forum (just my experience, those guys are kind of hardcore)? You know lets make our own DebianBangs together. Help each other out and show why this is the best Linux community out there. I mean, I signed up and I'm not real big into forums, but everyone seemed so cool and everyone's doing cool things with #!. Oh and everyone helps everyone. Awesome concept!

Just some recent thoughts on the whole matter. I mean dude's busy, we should enjoy the gift he's givin' us, and quit bothering him with the whole when's the next release thing. #! for me now is like life and the next release is the grave. I'm not in too big a hurry to get there until the time is right. If I want to spice things up I'll learn more about conky, tint2 or openbox and if/ when I get those down pretty well then I'll move on to building the Debian system I want and learning to "roll" a kernel to get my broadcom working.

Re: crunchbang 9.10 release

dummy@example.com (Bruce) — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 13:32:28 +0000

bozhkov wrote:

If there is a 9.10 release, the one and only my proposal would be corenominal to become a milionaire, and, of course, to start sending free cd-s :D Joke aside, this 9.04 release is perfect, but lets not forget that it (well, ubuntu jaunty) is going to be supported till october this year, so I guess another build on either ubuntu lts or debian would be nice.

I've made my case known, I'd like a Debian based #! of the "testing" type. From things I have seen around the net Debian Testing is more stable than an Ubuntu release.

It's no secret that Ubuntu takes Debian DEB's and "modifies them" to be Ubuntu Debs, and that, IMHO, is where the "Oops! Factor" comes into play with Ubuntu.

Sure, Debian Testing still isn't bleeding edge (it's still using Conky v1.7.1.1 - so no LUA) but Debian is, again IMHO, synonymous with "stable".

Yea yea, I know there is no such thing as a truly "stable" release for every machine! hardware plays a BIG factor.

OK, if Lucid has dropped HAL (GREAT NEWS) did Debian drop HAL as well?

Have a nice day.
Bruce

EDIT: #! V9.04.01 hasn't given me any problems at all. It seems "Rock Solid", and I'm not going to start tossing dynamite at it to see just how much it will take either.

Lucid is 3 months 3 weeks away, if #! doesn't go Debian, I'll wait for Lucid! That's what I think of #! v9.04.01

Re: crunchbang 9.10 release

dummy@example.com (bozhkov) — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 12:01:30 +0000

If there is a 9.10 release, the one and only my proposal would be corenominal to become a milionaire, and, of course, to start sending free cd-s :D Joke aside, this 9.04 release is perfect, but lets not forget that it (well, ubuntu jaunty) is going to be supported till october this year, so I guess another build on either ubuntu lts or debian would be nice.

Re: crunchbang 9.10 release

dummy@example.com (anonymous) — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 17:00:57 +0000

Well periodical releases generally use frozen repositories whereas rolling releases don't. To change from one to the other would mean changing repos and that gets messy.

Re: crunchbang 9.10 release

dummy@example.com (Digit) — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:55:12 +0000

[*]Sticking with #! 9.04.01 until 10.04 LTS is released[/*] or is that 10.10?

that'll do me. 9.04 works right now, so i'm not rocking the boat until i can move to a boat i can sit around in unrocked for even longer, should i so choose.

and as for rolling release... dunno why we cant just have the periodical releases n hit mod+U for update whenever we feel like to get a "rolling release" feel.

Re: crunchbang 9.10 release

dummy@example.com (snowpine) — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:21:05 +0000

susikala wrote:

Basically, there's no difference between basing Crunchbang on an Ubuntu LTS or Debian testing; it's the same thing, roughly same length of release cycles, too.

I can't agree with this statement. Number 1, Debian Testing is rolling release, Ubuntu LTS is not. Number 2, Ubuntu introduces a lot of new "stuff" that hasn't been through the Debian upstream.

A better analogy would be Debian Stable and Ubuntu LTS.

Re: crunchbang 9.10 release

dummy@example.com (susikala) — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:00:55 +0000

snowpine wrote:

Squeeze, Lenny, Jaunty, Intrepid, Hardy, and every #! release to date are also all based on Sid... your point? ;)

Actually, I should make the point that Ubuntu guidelines dictate that LTS releases import from Debian testing.

Basically, there's no difference between basing Crunchbang on an Ubuntu LTS or Debian testing; it's the same thing, roughly same length of release cycles, too.

I'm in for dropping Crunchbang 9.10 completely (I see no real problems with 9.04) and basing the next release off Lucid, and then release another version in 12.04. Until then Shuttleworth may have got Debian and Ubuntu to cooperate on an LTS / Debian release.

Edit: how about you begin tracking Lucid now? they've dropped hal completely and use a really great kernel, it seems to quite a promising release.