• From: California, USA
  • Registered: 2008-11-29
  • Posts: 8,647

Topic: CrunchBang versioning scheme

Maybe Im thinking too hard, but I dont think it makes sense for CrunchBang to use Ubuntu's version number. And my reason is because Ubuntu uses the month and year for its versioning.

So for example, CrunchBang Linux 8.10.01rc1 "Lite" Edition should really be CrunchBang Linux 9.xx RC1 "Lite" Edition (9 = 2009 and xx = month you plan on releasing).

Of course, changing the version number now would cause confusion. Possibly.

Note: ** Please read before posting **

BTW if you wish to contact me, send me an e-mail instead of a PM.
  • Scrat
  • #! CrunchBanger
  • Offline
  • From: Denmark
  • Registered: 2009-01-10
  • Posts: 164

Re: CrunchBang versioning scheme

Actually I think this is a good idea !

After all it's only the codebase that #! Crunchbang has in common with ubuntu.

But when we are at it, why not give it a codename, with different themes for the Lite vs. heavy version + the release number.

The first Arch Linux I've used was named "Don't Panic" smile

I know that Corenominal somewhere had named this version "The number of the beast" because the size of the .iso was 666 MB!
But maybe that would offense some people big_smile

We could make a vote for what to call the editions ?? (animals, cars, airplanes etc.)

/Niels
Registered Linux user #133791 > Get counted at http://counter.li.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So Many Things To Do, And No Time For Nuts !
  • Registered: 2009-01-02
  • Posts: 33

Re: CrunchBang versioning scheme

Scrat wrote:

I know that Corenominal somewhere had named this version "The number of the beast" because the size of the .iso was 666 MB!
But maybe that would offense some people big_smile

Personally, I find any Linux distribution that sports a release number greater than the number of times I've had sex extremely offensive, which is why I'll never use Slackware or OpenSUSE. I am, however, most satisfied with Ubuntu and Crunchbang and their version numbers. wink

Last edited by AlexelA (2009-01-13 08:11:03)

  • From: Lincoln, UK
  • Registered: 2008-11-20
  • Posts: 4,246

Re: CrunchBang versioning scheme

^^ too funny! lol

My website | Follow me on Twitter | CrunchBang on DistroWatch

corenominal's Website

  • DUDE
  • #! Member
  • Offline
  • From: Krypton?
  • Registered: 2008-12-16
  • Posts: 56

Re: CrunchBang versioning scheme

I lol'd tongue

Wrapped in just a blanket I was sent here from far far away to protect the people of this world! *NOT*
Last.fm
  • seth
  • #! CrunchBanger
  • Offline
  • From: thefilthynorthwest
  • Registered: 2008-11-30
  • Posts: 106

Re: CrunchBang versioning scheme

AlexelA wrote:
Scrat wrote:

I know that Corenominal somewhere had named this version "The number of the beast" because the size of the .iso was 666 MB!
But maybe that would offense some people big_smile

Personally, I find any Linux distribution that sports a release number greater than the number of times I've had sex extremely offensive, which is why I'll never use Slackware or OpenSUSE. I am, however, most satisfied with Ubuntu and Crunchbang and their version numbers. wink

i'm sure debian is a closer match then tongue

[ portfolio/wallpapers ] [ last.fm ]
  • OjM
  • New member
  • Offline
  • From: Cold Finland
  • Registered: 2009-01-15
  • Posts: 3

Re: CrunchBang versioning scheme

Me thinks crunchie is a real distribution already, so why is there ubuntu in those magic files?
/proc/version
/etc/*release

  • From: Las Vegas Mixx Forums
  • Registered: 2008-12-02
  • Posts: 396

Re: CrunchBang versioning scheme

I think the versioning scheme linking it to Ubuntu, especially for Google searches, is fine as it is.

=========== You are the dreamer, and the dream ===========

gooplusplus.com (goo++) --- compact multi search + 77 internet radio stations

NewCityVegas's Website

  • From: norway
  • Registered: 2009-01-16
  • Posts: 272

Re: CrunchBang versioning scheme

NewCityVegas wrote:

I think the versioning scheme linking it to Ubuntu, especially for Google searches, is fine as it is.

i second that.. googling for solutions is paramount.. i always google like --> sometrouble ubuntu 8.10
so making it as obvious as possible what version CB is based on works well IMHO

10 Reply by OjM

  • OjM
  • New member
  • Offline
  • From: Cold Finland
  • Registered: 2009-01-15
  • Posts: 3

Re: CrunchBang versioning scheme

And just how many times do you check your version from those files?

I was just thinking of it as a fine-tuning thing. If you don't have any idea where Crunchbang came from, you just might not know about those files...
I didn't know about those files before the day I posted that.

If you'd make your own distribution and it would read like Red Hat everywhere, it would make me think that the distro is not very serious and I might also wonder what Red Hat would like about that. CentOS cannot have those Red Hat names either...

Edit: Meh... When I read again, it seems I just confused those last 2 posts to be a reply to mine...

Last edited by OjM (2009-01-17 23:33:04)