crunchbang 9.10 release (Page 2 of 10)

also a full install is needed to get the full experience of grub2 and ext4, package sources break in upgrade, also intel seems to be the main focus of graphics ati is awful, im doing an 2 installs with nvidia now and itsdefinitely better supported than ati but graphics cards seem to add time to boot, also usplash and xsplash is excessive but i can deal.

Last edited by monkeybritt (2009-11-03 16:08:46)

failure is only a negative way to describe a learning experience.
i am constantly learning.

Not for me... my intel graphics (945g, one of the most common chips in the world!) is not supported at all by Karmic (desktop consistently crashes within 5 seconds), still using Jaunty...

Once they iron out the multiple issues that are keeping me from giving Karmic a third chance, I look forward to enjoying the improved graphic support.  But that would only be icing on the cake...till then it's lipstick on a pig.

LOL - I am not sure I would go that far, but I know what you mean. The Register's article has attracted a lot of attention, but I am not that it sure it is overly balanced. The comments are probably of more interest.

On a personal note, I have to admit that I have not particularly enjoyed the Karmic experience so far. I have been running various instances of it since the early alpha releases and it has not been much fun. I am feeling somewhat disillusioned with the direction Canonical/Ubuntu are headed. I think I should probably stop now, before I end up ranting.

^ as am I.

I installed Squeeze on my desktop/server earlier today. I will be taking a good look at it with regards to porting CrunchBang.

Interesting... I would have mixed feelings about "SqueezeBang."

On the one hand, it would be more work in the short term, both for you, Philip, and for the #! users, who would have to adjust to something new. The forums would see all kinds of questions like "What is Iceweasel and where did Firefox go?" or "Why doesn't my Broadcom wireless work?" Also I have a certain soft spot for Ubuntu (since it was my first-ever distro) and would be nostalgic to leave it behind.

But then on the other hand, long term, getting off the six-month bus would be really nice for everyone's sanity. Having been an Ubuntu user since 7.10 and a #! user since 8.04, I'm now on my 5th cycle of new-release-fresh-install (actually 6 if you count reinstalling 9.04 after 9.10 didn't work). The thought of an operating system that you need to reinstall fresh every 6 months is kind of laughable if you think about it. (Lots of Windows users still going strong with XP after 8 years!)

One neat thing about Debian is the unstable/testing/stable heirarchy. I recommend taking a look at AntiX (if you haven't already) for how to handle this. It uses Testing by default. However, they have really clear instructions on how you can switch to Stable or Unstable in a couple of easy steps. This essentially gives you 3 distros in 1, allowing you to choose how stable/bleeding edge you are comfortable with. It also comes with smxi, which is a really neat script for updating and installing stuff.

I am not going to cast my vote one way or another. Since I am equally comfortable with Ubuntu, Debian, or Arch at this point, it doesn't make much difference to me which one #! is based on. I hope that, as always, Corenomial considers #! a pet project and uses whichever base system he is personally most comfortable with.

CrunchBang is getting a lot more interesting now

I'll have what Joe_Doe's having.

How much flexibility is there in including blobs for hardware like Broadcom cards and nVidia video in the kernel on Debian-based systems?  Could it still be referred to as a Debian or would it have to be rebranded?

If it must be distributed without blobs, some simple instructions in the Wiki on rolling kernels with proprietary binaries would be helpful.

...so I guess that's a "yea" for Debian.

^ No thanks - Karmic is based on Sid.

I know the latest Ubuntu is always based on Debian unstable.  I thought Sid was a specific release; I didn't realize it was Debian code for "whatever the bleeding edge is".  So nevermind what I said.

Debian Unstable or 'Sid' as its permanantly monickered can be thought of as the spawn point of all Debian releases. Its repository is updated continously and contains packages currently under heavy development. It is for Debian dev's and is not intended for daily usage by anyone else. Once these packages have undergone some testing they are released into the Testing or 'Squeeze' repo's. After a further period when they've been well tested they are frozen, no more packages are added and whatever bugs remain are ironed out. This is then released as Stable, currently 'Lenny'. The packages in Lenny's repo' really are quite old. Many choose not to use Lenny as a desktop, but it does make an excellent server base.

Sid was never meant to be the basis for a desktop system, it's called unstable for a reason. If you like to live on the edge and enjoy fixing frequent breakages then Sid might be fun to play with, but for anyone who wants their computer to boot every time they turn it on Sid is best avoided.

There are projects like Sidux that have tried to turn Sid into a stable usable system, anyone who's tried Sidux will know how unstable it can still be.

For most people Testing will be as far as they want to go with Debian and will provide the best desktop experience.