 DistroWatch Weekly |
| Tip Jar |
If you've enjoyed this week's issue of DistroWatch Weekly, please consider sending us a tip.
(Tips this week: 0, value: US$0.00) |
|
|
|
 bc1qxes3k2wq3uqzr074tkwwjmwfe63z70gwzfu4lx  lnurl1dp68gurn8ghj7ampd3kx2ar0veekzar0wd5xjtnrdakj7tnhv4kxctttdehhwm30d3h82unvwqhhxarpw3jkc7tzw4ex6cfexyfua2nr  86fA3qPTeQtNb2k1vLwEQaAp3XxkvvvXt69gSG5LGunXXikK9koPWZaRQgfFPBPWhMgXjPjccy9LA9xRFchPWQAnPvxh5Le paypal.me/distrowatchweekly • patreon.com/distrowatch |
|
| Extended Lifecycle Support by TuxCare |
|
|
| Reader Comments • Jump to last comment |
1 • GCC vs. Clang (by Koroshiya Itchy on 2012-01-23 09:37:09 GMT from Belgium)
And what about the speed of the complied binaries? Do you expect it to be identical?
2 • Compile speed (by distrohopper on 2012-01-23 09:59:19 GMT from Germany)
In several tests i made, clang++ is 15-40% faster than g++ (with or without multiple jobs and/or pre-compiled headers, always using -O2).
Granted, clang vs gcc (compiling C) is probably not much of a difference, but since C compiling is very fast anyway, that doesn't matter as much as compiling C++, right...
3 • GCC vs. Clang (by Magic Banana on 2012-01-23 11:07:44 GMT from Brazil)
I tried to compile, with -O3 optimization level, a C++ program where time performances are a must (it solves an NP-hard problem). The versions of GCC and Clang are those available in Trisquel GNU/Linux's repository. When executing both binaries on an input that requires tens of minutes of execution, the one compiled with Clang was about 18% slower. I believe Phoronix found, some time ago, a similar degradation of performance when Clang was used in replacement of GCC. However, I could not find this article again.
4 • Quiet on DW? (by Andrew on 2012-01-23 11:08:52 GMT from Australia)
I cannot remember when only a single distro release happened between editions of DWW. Hope it's just been a slow news week! :D
5 • Tiny Core - CorePlus (by DavidEF on 2012-01-23 11:42:08 GMT from United States)
I've thought for a while that Tiny Core seemed like an interesting idea, but I have never tried it. I'm not very interested in booting up with practically no functionality at all, and installing thousands of packages to get a useful system. Don't even talk to me about "Compile from source" distros like Gentoo! But, CorePlus seems like the right idea to me. I might have to give it a try. The simplicity of a good foundation, ready to be built on, is a little tempting.
I've used Puppy a lot for when I need a quick-booting live system to do something specific. It is currently my favorite low-resource distro. It is especially great for older hardware, which most other "low resource" distros seem to neglect. I never used it as a normal, every-day operating system, though. It just isn't enough for me, and very hard to add anything to, compared to the major distros, like Ubuntu. If CorePlus can give me a sure and stable foundation, with little or no bloat, that I can easily "fluff up" to my usual standard of comfort, that would be the best of both worlds!
6 • LLVM vs GCC (by Mustafa on 2012-01-23 12:23:34 GMT from Iraq)
These are good benchmarks:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=llvm3_gcc_open64
www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=gcc_46_llvm29
7 • Tiny Cored (by schultzter on 2012-01-23 13:15:16 GMT from Canada)
I love the idea of Tiny Core and how quickly it boots up to a usable system. Of course it depends what you mean by usable, for me a web browser covers 90% of my needs.
I have to admit I don't use it as much as I want though, since it's hard to justify leaving all that hard drive space empty that I've got.
8 • Re: GCC vs. Clang (by Koroshiya Itchy on 2012-01-23 14:19:03 GMT from Belgium)
Hi Mustafa, thanks for the benchmarks. They are a bit contradictory. However, it would seem that, on average, Clang is a bit faster when compiling (about 15%). Regarding the speed of the produced binaries, there is no clear winner. However, in general, the codes for which GCC is more advantageous, are more relevant for me. It also seems that certain codes do not easily compile with Clang.
9 • Tiny Core and FreeBSD (by hughetorrance on 2012-01-23 14:43:34 GMT from United Kingdom)
The music player with Tny Core is non other than VLC so that's great,thanks for the admission about your install problem with FREEBSD,I,m sure that will refresh and encourage others to keep going and not get too discouraged. LOL that sort of thing happens to just about everyone.
n.b. I love them both and loads of other distros...like Slackware
10 • Long Live Pardus! (by Rick on 2012-01-23 15:16:07 GMT from Canada)
I recently built a computer with an AMD A6 3400 processor and a BIOSTAR TA75M+ motherboard. I wanted a system with a multi-processor which supported the latest technologies like USB 3.0, SATA v.3, HDMI etc. The motherboard, I discovered, also has UEFI instead of the traditional BIOS (no setup choice).
I managed to install Windows 7 (64-bit) without any real problem, but I really wanted to use Linux as I was not ready to spend over $100 for an OS. I tried my favourite Mint 12 (64-bit), OpenSUSE, Sabayon 7 and others (all 64-bit) without any luck. All proved incompatible with the built-in AMD graphics processor (early in the installs, the screen went black forever).
Super OS installed, but after applying the first updates, I was back to black screen ( same result with a few other distros). CentOS 6.2 installed OK, but was not suitable as a desktop system (great for server duty and command line configuration).
I tried Pardus 2011.2 (64-bit) and struck paydirt! It installed without incident and I have been using it ever since. I have applied updates without incident and I am very satisfied.
I have been a loyal Mint user for a few years, with Pardus as my second choice, but I have to salute the Pardus team for the work they continue to do and hope their reorganization means a better future for the distro.
11 • @10, Why? (by Eddie on 2012-01-23 15:39:28 GMT from United States)
It's great that Pardus was able to work for you. It's a good distro. I was just wondering what is causing the problem that the other distros are having with the graphics? Why incompatible?
Thanks
12 • @ Jesse (by Anonymous on 2012-01-23 15:56:35 GMT from United States)
LLVM/Clang is not the default compiler in FreeBSD, yet. It probably won't be until version 10, though considering the massive number of patches required to fix the gcc monoculture in ports, it may not happen until 11.
13 • Compile comparison (by Jesse on 2012-01-23 16:06:28 GMT from Canada)
>> "And what about the speed of the complied binaries? Do you expect it to be identical?"
I didn't expect them to be, but they were nearly identical. As I wrote in this week's column: "The run times of programs were generally quite close. Sometimes the GCC binaries were faster, sometimes the Clang binaries were faster, but in each case the difference was a percentage point or two, hardly worth mentioning. "
>> "LLVM/Clang is not the default compiler in FreeBSD, yet. It probably won't be until version 10,"
I didn't claim it was. I pointed out Clang is being brought in and GCC is being phased out. The process is likely to take another couple of years. According to the FreeBSD website they want to be free of software licensed under the GNU GPL in time for FreeBSD 10.0.
The way I see it, in the worse case scenario, if they can't get everything to compile with Clang, they can make GCC a build requirement for those few ports which require it and have it installed as a dependency at compile time.
14 • #10/#11: Pardus and hardware compatability (by Caitlyn Martin on 2012-01-23 16:08:39 GMT from United States)
I can't answer why Rick had better luck with Pardus on his specific system. I can share one observation about why Pardus, in general, has better hardware support than most. The project is located in Turkey, a country without software patents or anything like the DMCA in the U.S. Consequently, Pardus developers have no reason not to include anything which might be patent encumbered or even proprietary. They include many closed source drivers and a bunch of proprietary firmware by default which other distros either must leave out to comply with the law in their respective countries or which they may choose to leave out to be free (or in the case of Fedora, nearly free) by Free Software Foundation (FSF) standards. Having all of that code available at installation time allows Pardus to automagically setup more hardware than most other distros. I leave it up to individuals to decide whether that's a good thing or a bad thing :)
15 • Tiny Core review (by Caitlyn Martin on 2012-01-23 16:18:27 GMT from United States)
Jesse, thanks for the excellent review of Tiny Core this week. You clearly describe both the benefits and shortcomings of the little distribution. The 170MB memory footprint doesn't surprise me. Some lightweight distros manage to have a smaller footprint than Tiny Core even with a substantially larger iso to start with. The philosophy behind tiny core is all about small and not about lightweight so much. Still, for almost any system built in the last 10 years or so Tiny Core should work well provided the hardware is supported. One of the trade offs of going so small is leaving out support for some hardware.
I definitely agree that CorePlus makes Tiny Core much more useful. The result is very similar to what Damn Small Linux was, which probably isn't surprising since Robert Shingledecker did so much development work in that distro. Having an updated distro that fits easily on systems with small SSDs or hard drives can be very useful. It's a niche, but it's a niche that is only filled by a very few distros.
16 • Tiny Core (by Jesse on 2012-01-23 16:31:08 GMT from Canada)
@15:
Thank Caitlyn. To be honest, I was a bit surprised CorePlus took up as much memory as it did, but I suppose it's within reasonable limits, considering how much bigger CorePlus is over the base project.
17 • Ram usage (by C. Random on 2012-01-23 16:37:46 GMT from Finland)
Just curious, how was the ram usage measured?
Also, was it with only included apps, or with something more installed and running?
18 • TinyCore Ram usage (by Ram on 2012-01-23 17:04:40 GMT from France)
@16 and 17
it depends on how you use Tiny Core Linux.
In my experience, you need 32mb ram in order to boot the base system, 24mb ram to boot the Micro Core variant of it (without GUI). Both TC and MC won't use much more than 40-50 mb ram when you use it without other extensions. As the system runs into ram, you are likely to get more ram usage if you use a fater install package like CorePlus.
Then, you have options in order to make extensions not fully loading into ram. Your will have a basic (but operational and very responsive) system (web browser, email client, window manager, office suite, text editor, and some other stuff like calendar, flash, audio-video players) for less than 400 mb ram if you don't use them all at the same time.
Then, you have to compile the missing extensions -- the applications that you want to use, and that are not delivered in TC. This is why, in my opinion, it is not a distro for everyone. But the idea is very interesting indeed.
19 • RAM usage (by ix on 2012-01-23 17:31:06 GMT from Romania)
From the second picture of TinyCore, I understand that it uses 85 MB of RAM 230 - 126 (cache) - 19 (buffer) = 85. That seems to be with an open terminal and text editor.
As you probably know, cache stores data in RAM so it can be accessed faster and it is cleared automatically in need, so the more cache, the better.
As far as I know, TinyCore is loaded entirely into RAM, so 85 MB of RAM in that case may be ok, but my custom Debian with fluxbox uses about 50 MB with a few apps open but you can't compare Debian with TinyCore.
20 • RE:19 (by Landor on 2012-01-23 20:04:02 GMT from Canada)
How did you build your Debian system? Also, what applications are the few you're discussing, and what is the exact amount of RAM used?
Thank You.
Keep your stick on the ice...
Landor
21 • we? (by marcus on 2012-01-23 20:29:57 GMT from United States)
"We tried installing again, making sure to stick with defaults and safe options, and again the system wouldn't boot. We read through..."
How many distrowatch staffers does it take to screw in a light bulb?
22 • (Tiny) Core Linux CD boot (by bmarkus on 2012-01-23 20:51:24 GMT from Hungary)
You do not need to boot Core, CorePlus or TinyCore from a CD, just create a bootable USB stick from a downloaded ISO file using core2usb. It is dedicated WIndows installer available at SourceForge. It offers a fast and convenient way to start for those on Windows.
23 • RE:10, 11 14 Pardus (by Stimpy on 2012-01-23 20:53:17 GMT from United States)
Is he using a CRT monitor. I get a lot of scrambled splash screens on start up lately and sometimes it comes up with a black screen.
Other new distros just put a small splash screen on the upper left corner of the screen.
24 • @20 (by ix on 2012-01-23 21:47:21 GMT from Romania)
I took the netinstall image (squeeze) and I installed without selecting anything in the lists (deselecting if there was something).
After that I installed xorg, fluxbox and everything else I need, like rox-filer, wicd, mplayer, audacious and so on. I use a lot of LXDE apps, but I can give you a list if you want.
Without open apps, just fluxbox and xterm, it uses exactly 30 MB of RAM, I've just checked. By the way, I disabled recommends in /etc/apt/apt.conf.
25 • Tiny Core (by nightflier on 2012-01-23 23:36:04 GMT from United States)
I just resuscitated an old laptop (P3 with 128 MB RAM) using Tiny Core. Right after a cold boot top shows about 60 used, 6 buff, 31 cached. Using htop it shows 24 used. Surfing with Opera, using wireless, works well for what I do.
26 • E17 distros... (by Neal on 2012-01-24 01:14:03 GMT from United States)
All this talk about how great Bodhi is makes me wonder if they have ever used Macpup? Macpup is IMO the finest rendition of a completed E17 desktop ever.....So, if you don't want to fiddle faddle around with installing apps give the tiny download of macpup a shot.
27 • tiny core -- overseen feature and use (by stefan on 2012-01-24 01:32:54 GMT from Germany)
I think the review did oversee a major feature of tinycore: The pristine state of the system after each reboot. It just mounts images of the software, and you have full control over what gets saved. From that ability + the small ressource-requirements comes a -- well, also niche -- usfullness other distros lack: since most oses, including the one from Redmond, offer some kind of easy-to-use virtualisation technology, you can use tinycore as a general-purpose-client, the users can employ without having to install anything, or just as virtual-machine. Just use openvpn (for example) for your enterprise network, and give everybody his own tinycore on a stick, to do whatever reqired from anywhere -- they can boot the stick or run it in a virtual machine. No secrets on uncontrolled computers, no permanent mod of the client ...
Well, at least i think i could use tinycore for something like this; the point is: as far as i understood the docs, the pristine state thing is a major feature for tinycore, it should have been mentioned.
s.
28 • @21 (by Chris on 2012-01-24 06:59:11 GMT from Germany)
"How many distrowatch staffers does it take to screw in a light bulb?"
I tried the new Free/PC-BSD release myself. I failed to. Not on a unbootable Installation, but on an otherwise unusable System. I give BSD a try everytime a Major Version comes up but so far it was a disapointment every time, big time.
IMHO is BSD at a Level of usability that most Linux Distros passed years ago: You can use them, but dont expect a good experience. Sry for my bad english. I really dont know how to put it. It will, most likely, come over the wrong way ;)
Im talking about the use as a Desktop. Not as a Server!
29 • Tiny Core 4.2 - other missed features (by Kent on 2012-01-24 07:54:32 GMT from United States)
Another built-in feature is the TinyCore terminal server, which can spawn
a whole army of TC instances pxe-style.
I booted TC 4.2.1 into a VirtualBox 128MB RAM + 128MB HD
Installed
30 • Pardus (by Ambleston Dack on 2012-01-24 07:59:32 GMT from United Kingdom)
This is a great little distro and is the OS on our family laptop as well as my daughters PC. I hope this distro doesn't die as its been a good reliable OS. I've been using it since 2008 and it hasn't let me down. IMHO its the best looking KDE 4.x distro out there.
31 • Tiny Core 4.2.1 - corrections and other missed features (by ke4nt on 2012-01-24 09:16:09 GMT from United States)
Thanks for posting another nice article about Tiny Core Linux! One of my favs.
Let me mention some additional information regarding some of the comments,
and features not mentioned in today's article.
Both username and passwording can be setup at boottime, using the bootcodes "user=foo" and "secure". This requests passwords for both root and user foo early in the bootup. The "noautologin" option will force a user/pass to be used once booted. This is especially helpful for openssh, and when using many of your existing resources. (see below)
When installing the OS, if the option to use "whole disk" is selected, (in the case of a pendrive or a VirtualBox instance) the device is zeroed, partitioned and formatted automatically, without falling back to fdisk.
If you wish to install TinyCore alongside another linux OS (where existing partitions already reside), simply copy the vmlinuz and core.gz found in the /tce/boot of the iso to your existing /boot directory, and the /tce directory to the / of your filesystem, and add a simple grub entry to your grub menu. No "installer" needed.
title TinyCoreLinux 4.2.1
root (hd0,0)
kernel /boot/vmlinuz
initrd /boot/core.gz
Using the home=sdXx bootcode, you can use your existing home directory from your favorite flavor of distro, as a persistent store and home directory for TC. Access your usual collection of files, scripts and data at every bootup. Other persistent directories like /opt can also be setup at boot time.
The app-audit program has the ability to update your currently installed applications to
the latest versions, if a newer one is available, and handle all dependencies.
The tce-terminal-server can launch a whole army of TinyCores into your awaiting pxe-booted VMs. 1GB of ram + 1GB of HD can launch dozens, 64MB RAM + 64MB HD at a time.
Most all downloaded applications can be launched either into ram, for max speed, or loop mounted to conserve ram. Cloud mode is all ram-based, but Mount mode has options. Mix & match.
TinyCore uses zswap, a compressed ram block, that extends the use of your ram beyond the normal ram limits. Existing swap partitions can be used, and swapfiles can be created with the built-in tools.
The ezremaster extension allows you to build the installation of your dreams, then burn a new iso to be installed onto your pendrives and other writable devices with your perfect themes, fonts, script collections, music and application selections. Update, edit, and burn again and again. Or strip out any unneeded portions for the perfect kiosk.
There is a 64 bit kernel in the repository, along with the source and .config file for it, and a 64 bit initrd (core64.gz) that replaces the 32 bit versions.
The compiletc extension provides a full compile environment. Recompile the kernel or any other modules/apps. Most of the available extensions are compiled this way.
Extensions exist for jfs , xfs , reiserfs, fuse, nfs, ntfs, etc. Mount most anything.
Microcore is only 7.9MBs and excludes the XVesa and X apps. The CLI-based "ab" application browser allows you to construct a powerful CLI-only environment.
Distro upgrades are super-simple. Usually requires nothing more than replacing the two boot files, vmlinuz and core.gz, with the latest versions.
Extensions for files and addons for QEMU, KVM, VMWare environments. Performs lighting-fast in VirtualBox and other virtual desktops.
Google provides step-by-step instructions for adding your favorite server. xampp, apache, lighttpd, edna, ampache, dovecot, nginx, monkey, openldap, mysql, sqlite, postgresql, vsftpd. Nearly all are available from the Tiny Core repositories.
32 • SCaLE 10X (by ke4nt on 2012-01-24 09:36:28 GMT from United States)
We enjoyed seeing many of you @ SCaLE 10X. Our booth was super-busy! Discussions regarding appliance use, ARM support, Android support and upcoming features were hot topics! This was our 5th year, and we appreciated seeing many familiar faces once again.
The reports we heard regarding specialized uses of TinyCore for Seniors and Kids, the numerous questions regarding new features, and the stories about using TinyCore for anything from a old-radio/pico player, to a learning tool for linux exploration, needing a quick shell to perform a server-near-death on-location fix, and bringing some laptops back to life that some of the *other* vendors there @ SCaLE were unable to do, were heartfelt and welcomed. See you next year!
33 • @28 (by django on 2012-01-24 09:39:40 GMT from Netherlands)
Too bad PC-BSD is not working for you. Have you tried posting your problems at their forums?
I have installed pc-bsd (as a long time freebsd server user) and was happy with what I experienced up until now. I do agree that it has a few rough edges like:
1) auto-mounting (ntfs) removable drives did not work and I had to use the cli to access these drives
2) my printer required a port compilation
3) after installing firefox, I had to manually state that other users needed the icons on their desktop too
But the stability andvery modest memory compensation are a huge improvement over other OS's I had on my box previously. Plus, being able to play multimedia out of the box on a freebsd derived system, is marvelous.
I can recommend PC-BSD to every reasonably unix/linux familiar operator.
34 • PC-BSD (by jadecat09 on 2012-01-24 11:03:34 GMT from United Kingdom)
I installed PC-BSD 9.0 on the first day it was released and have not looked back.
Granted, there were some teething problems. But after posting on the forum my system was running smoothly within 48 hours.
With service like that, What's there not to like.
35 • @33 (by Burt on 2012-01-24 12:13:00 GMT from United Kingdom)
" 2) my printer required a port compilation"
This one line defines exactly why FreeBSD in whatever guise as well as many linux distros have a very long way to go before being excepted on the desktop by regular users.
36 • @35, Not from my point of view. (by Eddie on 2012-01-24 13:28:32 GMT from United States)
" 2) my printer required a port compilation"
the exception and not the rule.
"This one line defines exactly why FreeBSD in whatever guise as well as many linux distros have a very long way to go before being excepted on the desktop by regular users."
I really can't see where this statement has merit for a lot of the linux distros available. Most installs have a very workable system in a very short time. Furthermore most regulars users will never install an operating system. Most regular users want a turnkey system and that can be supplied with any operating system. Unless the REGULAR user needs "specialized software", or is a "heavy PC gamer", they don't care and will use anything without a problem. The tablet computer and smartphone market has already shown that is the case.
Think "social networking". :)
37 • @35 (by django on 2012-01-24 13:31:30 GMT from Netherlands)
Indeed,
but I know the developers of PC-BSD know this as well and are busy providing a elegant solution for this. Must say, in defence of the user friendly linux distro's, that ubuntu, linux mint and opensuse automatically recognized and configured my printer.
Freebsd in disguise, PC-BSD, is another story but fortunately after the make install clean step, I could configure the printer.
38 • leightweight distros (by morri on 2012-01-24 15:07:55 GMT from Germany)
I always find it funny that most tests for small distros are done on such sophisticated pcs.
I had the same issue when a reviewer tested lubuntu on a 2.5 ghz machine with 3 gb ram?
Sure those small distros won't tun much faster compareable to other buntus if the machine already have a high standard speed.
I don't exactly run tiny core but I do run lubuntu, and it makes a significant difference in performance on my elderly pc(998mhz (512 mb))(in comparison to ubuntu or linux mint)
39 • @31 TC (by subg on 2012-01-24 16:32:33 GMT from United States)
"The tce-terminal-server can launch a whole army of TinyCores into your awaiting pxe-booted VMs".
What's the intended use that's envisioned with that feature?
40 • gcc vs clang -- regarding language support (by Christos Gitsis on 2012-01-24 18:14:21 GMT from Greece)
I agree that clang gives more useful error and warning messages.
But one aspect when comparing the two compilers could also be the status of implementation of language features. Regarding support of C++11 features, gcc is somewhat ahead of clang ( http://wiki.apache.org/stdcxx/C%2B%2B0xCompilerSupport ).
41 • @subg (by TC User on 2012-01-25 00:37:42 GMT from United States)
tce-terminal-server can be used to start PCs if they can pxe boot.
This could be used in an office where you want the user computers to have nothing on them, no hard drive. They can network boot TC and get to a graphical desktop quickly.
From here they could have a handful of apps available or it could launch into a Citrix Xen environment and run virtual MS Windows. Recycle old computers plus you don't have to worry about keeping all the desktops virus free and up to date.
Of course if there is any problem all the systems go down and then you get fired for bringing Linux to work.
42 • TinyCore and good reading (by Verndog on 2012-01-25 03:27:28 GMT from United States)
Thanks for this issue!
This has been so far the most enjoyable reading and the comments are also good reading.
I think another option for TinyCore, for me at least, as reparing a borked system. Fire up TC and in no time you can chroot over to the system in question. I use to enjoy Parted Magic, but over the years I have used it, booting now takes a long time. TC on the other hand is almost instantaneous.
43 • Low-end PC's (by RO on 2012-01-25 03:47:32 GMT from United States)
@38/morri: Try a Fujitsu Lifebook P1120 with 240 MB RAM available after the "work area" (emulation?) used by the wimpy TransMeta Crusoe 800 Mhz CPU (comparable to about 300-400 Mhz x86 - definitely slower than my Stylistic C500 with 500 Mhz Celeron).
Anything running on that has to be super light in resource requirements, and in the past, an older TC, and various Puppy versions could manage on it. CrunchBang 9 (based on Ubuntu 9.04 as I recall) did decently, and would support the touch screen, but #! 10 would not. Base Bodhi did OK, too, but I doubt the new Bloathi would.
The small, light size, touch screen, and track point keep me interested in experimenting with that old clunker for some reason, even with my super-duper Lifebook p1620 with its Core 2 1.2 GHZ and 2GB of RAM (and touch screen) for "serious" use. Both are more fun than a "honking big" 10-inch Android tablet, and so much more versatile (well, maybe the 1620...).
Fun stuff ;-)
44 • Bye Bye PC-BSD (by RayRay on 2012-01-25 04:08:24 GMT from United States)
Wanted to test PC-BSD, unfortunately this BSD took over my bootloader. I re-established my multiboot but after I booted to PC-BSD again it took over my bootloader.
Goodbye PC-BSD, I installed CentOS over it. Life is too short if they don't want to allow a multiboot they apparently don't need testing of their OS.
45 • RE: 24 - 42 + DWW/Ladislav (by Landor on 2012-01-25 05:51:08 GMT from Canada)
#24
Thank you again for the information.
I can't remember what my last install of Openbox with Debian used for RAM once it settled down, it was low though, doing the exact same way you had. I'm always surprised at the people who don't do it, yet want a light system, it's so simple.
There's a couple things that keep me using Openbox over Fluxbox, one being that it's written in C. The other is that I don't like the slit in Fluxbox, and if I'm going to replace it with something (which I would), I might as well just use Openbox. But based on your numbers, I'm sure Openbox used more than Fluxbox, but I don't see how that can be. I'll have to recheck again some time.
#42
It's funny a review was done about TinyCore. I was going to do one about the Plus ISO myself. One of the points I was going to discuss was its speed as you said, it boots fast. The only distribution I've found to easily beat it in boot speed is Ubuntu 11.10. For me, that makes Ubuntu the far better option as an 'instant on' system as I've said here before. Well, if it wasn't for the fact that it's not 'Free' (as in freedom).
Ladislav:
I haven't seen anyone else acknowledge this here, so I will. I've noticed that as of late you've been pointing out Gentoo related news items more than you have in a number of years. I for one appreciate it, if that counts for anything. Thank you.
Keep your stick on the ice...
Landor
46 • PCBSD9.0-x86-DVD.iso (by zykoda on 2012-01-25 08:35:03 GMT from United Kingdom)
Downloaded, burned and installed this on a primary partition yesterday. KDE desktop was chosen. Installation time well over I hour! Took me a little time to get it to boot mainly because I've not done that with GRUB2 for BSDs. I found apparently conflicting information re GRUB2, but it may be changes during GRUB2 evolution! There appears to be no reference to bootloader during PCBSD installation (maybe I missed it but I aborted first time because I found not reference to bootloader during installation setup). GRUB2 command "freebsd" -> "kfreebsd" in a direct boot. Chainloading worked once I had the disk order sorted. PCBSD installer ignored the setup of a user (bug?) and I had to use adduser CLI. Setting network host name during install was also ignored. Nvidia driver was installed by default and functioned without noticeable problems in the limited tests so far. There is some evidence of instability when an errant mouse click caused a cascade of windows (20 or so) to open! I suspect it was a file manager but am not sure. Machine was a random sample of spare parts. Phenom II X2 550 with ASUS M4N68T-M LE V2 motherboard, 6GB(4+2) DDR3-1333 RAM, 3D Fusion PCI Express 256MB GeForce 7600GS Graphics Card. 1 x 160GB IDE + 1 x 500GB sata, Benq DVD.
47 • GhostBSD (by greg on 2012-01-25 10:40:00 GMT from United States)
As @44, I tried to test GhostBSD by using Unetbootin. It too, took over my bootloader.
48 • Re: 44 • Bye Bye PC-BSD (by openSUSE User on 2012-01-25 12:49:57 GMT from United Kingdom)
> Wanted to test PC-BSD, unfortunately this BSD took over my bootloader.
> I re-established my multiboot but after I booted to PC-BSD again it took over my bootloader.
> Goodbye PC-BSD, I installed CentOS over it.
> Life is too short if they don't want to allow a multiboot they apparently don't need testing of their OS.
From the Users' Handbook (ftp://ftp.pcbsd.org/pub/handbook/9.0/handbook_en_ver9.0.pdf):
If you install PC-BSD on a computer that already contains an operating system, the first time you reboot, your computer will automatically boot into the previous operating system. You will need to configure a boot loader utility to recognize all of the operating systems that are installed and to provide you with a boot menu where you can select which operating system to boot into. The rest of this section will demonstrate how to configure the GAG, GRUB, and EasyBCD boot loaders. Select the boot loader that best suits your needs or which is already
installed on the computer.
You *did* read the handbook?
49 • @48 (openSUSE) (by BSD_newbie on 2012-01-25 13:32:25 GMT from Germany)
The problem is NOT that the previous OS gets booted; if that was the case, the existing boot loader could, indeed, be configured to boot PC-BSD as a second, third etc. OS. The problem, however, is that the PC-BSD bootloader OVERWRITES the existing boot loader, and I have yet to find my way around with the PC-BSD boot loader. Can anybody tell me what sort of loader PC-BSD uses and if it can be used to chainload Linux boot loaders present in the partition boot sectors? I use LILO and GRUB, no GRUB2 loader present.
Thank you.
50 • #49 (by zykoda on 2012-01-25 15:59:59 GMT from United Kingdom)
The handbook is not useful as far as I can tell. I think that having PCBSD on the non boot disk ( whatever the boot loader is?) has (intentionally) hidden some problems from me. The whole boot situation seems a bit diabolical!
51 • Re:48 (by RayRay on 2012-01-25 20:48:27 GMT from United States)
When ever I install an additional OS on one of my computers I always boot my Opensuse system and add the new operating system. Since I use Grub 1 if the new system uses Grub 2 I translate it to Grub 1. In the case of PC-BSD I chainloaded it as if it were an MS product.
By the way the only MS product that overwrites my bootloader is Windows 8.
Why the BSDs want to imitate this type of behavior is beyond me. At least make it optional in your next release if you want to be used and tested.
52 • Clang/LLVM (by Ryan Farmer on 2012-01-26 01:04:07 GMT from United States)
The reason for Clang and LLVM being the goal for FreeBSD has nothing to do with the licenses being incompatible. It has to do with the "restrictions" that the GPL places on companies like Apple that want to take away your freedom to use/study/change/improve the software.
FreeBSD's developers are more sympathetic to companies that come along wanting a handout than to actual users. Their method of operating is generally to appease companies with whatever the company wants. Generally, that is the ability to take free and open source software and bury it under a proprietary license and then give back as little as much as they choose. (There's no guarantee that anything Apple gives back, when they choose to, is as good as the one that they are using in OS X).
So, if the FreeBSD people don't care about my freedom and would rather appease companies that want a handout, I really don't care about FreeBSD. They only seem to care about getting as many incompatible fragmented forks of what was once BSD-licensed code out there as possible. The permissive licensing encourages every company that takes the code to make their own mods to it that don't necessarily ever come back into the upstream project.
If you want to look at how the BSD license has "simplified" things, by "encouraging code reuse", just take a look at how compatible each implementation of UFS is with each other implementation some time. (But it could just as easily be said for dozens of other things they claim their license helps create common implementations of.)
53 • Clang/LLVM (by BSDGuy on 2012-01-26 02:24:09 GMT from United States)
It is a licensing issue :(
newer GCC has been licensed under GPLv3 and it is incompatible with BSD license. Before it was ok with GPLv2, now it does not make sense.
The BSD code is truly free to be used like you want to(except claim that you wrote it), while the GPL code comes with more strings attached.
If you believe that BSD code is not really good, take a look at TCP/IP networking. Who are the original creators? where is it used? Yes, you got it right. Even Microsoft uses BSD code. Microsoft was caught using GPL code, and now it has to give code back to the GPL and to the linux kernel. The BSD folks don't require users to give back, but GPL does. Ask Microsoft who they really prefer to get code from? And don't tell me about quality of the code, in both cases I like both GPL and BSD code. What I don't like is the strings attached and the so called real freedoms. It is hyocritical. They use the word incorrectly.
54 • @53 BSD code (by RollMeAway on 2012-01-26 04:29:45 GMT from United States)
So, you spend days, weeks, months developing your project/application,
and ms, apple, or any other company, takes your code, incorporates it into theirs.
They charge their customers for that code, making money.
You get nothing, no money, no recognition, no feedback for improvements they made.
That is a good thing?!
Guess you went to a different school system than I.
55 • Something for nothing. (by Eddie on 2012-01-26 13:02:08 GMT from United States)
RollMeAway is correct. Anyone can take the so called "no strings attached" code and do anything they want to with it. Along with the "no strings attached" is no protection for the author of the code. The argument given by BSDGuy is illogical at best. Freedoms with "no strings attached" is anarchy. It has never worked for it promotes the "take what you can give nothing back" mentality. Of course MS, Apple or any other corporation would rather use good BSD code if they can find it. THERE ARE NO STRINGS ATTACHED. How smart is that? :)
56 • BSD code (by Toolz on 2012-01-26 14:42:35 GMT from Vietnam)
> "MS, Apple or any other corporation would rather use good BSD code if they can find it. THERE ARE NO STRINGS ATTACHED. How smart is that?"
Find a BSD guy and ask him.
57 • @54 & 55 (by OpenSourceRules on 2012-01-26 14:55:24 GMT from United States)
Why? Please read
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html
Also check out Opensource.org
http://www.opensource.org/
Each license has its advantages and disadvantages. Both have a place in our world. If you are a programmer, which one would you choose and why?
58 • Depends (by Jesse on 2012-01-26 16:18:26 GMT from Canada)
>> "So, you spend days, weeks, months developing your project/application, and ms, apple, or any other company, takes your code, incorporates it into theirs. They charge their customers for that code, making money.You get nothing, no money, no recognition, no feedback for improvements they made.
That is a good thing?! Guess you went to a different school system than I."
It really depends on what the developer is trying to accomplish. And how other people might use your code. If you're writing code you hope will benefit the most number of people without expecting anything in return, then the BSD license makes sense. Downstream companies might take the code and put in it closed-source apps or they might give back, it's their choice. But the original project will remain open source, so everyone (both open and closed source projects) will benefit. That's really altruism on the part of the upstream developer.
The GPL is useful for making sure code which would be distributed to customers is maintained as open source and can be rolled back into the upstream project. Useful for the upstream project, but it can be a licensing nightmare for downstream.
The unfortunate part of the GPL, I think, is it doesn't help at all when distribution isn't involved. For example, Google can take the Linux kernel, make all sorts of improvements, create a new file system using the GPLed code and they never have to give those improvements back, because they're not distributing outside of their own company. The GPL really only works if you're shipping a product.
The BSD license supports the freedom of the developer to do whatever they want, for good or bad. The GPL (usually) enforces freedom of the code.
59 • The question still remains. (by Eddie on 2012-01-26 19:03:45 GMT from United States)
@56, Already have. It seems that most BSD users are isolationist.
@57, I did read and thank you for the links. A statement from dreamland, "In addition, since the BSD license does not come with the legal complexity of the GPL or LGPL licenses, it allows developers and companies to spend their time creating and promoting good code rather than worrying if that code violates licensing."
Really? If's that's the case, then what happened? For all it's grandstanding, BSD code seems to be inferior. Either that or it's so specialized that it's just not developed for general computer use. It's license may be great for research and development but I can't see anymore benefit from that type of license and don't say it makes the quality of the code superior. That's a subjective statement.
@58, "The BSD license supports the freedom of the developer to do whatever they want, for good or bad. The GPL (usually) enforces freedom of the code."
Or it lets any corporation take the code and do what they want to for good or bad. If the BSD coder wants to give away his code to be used for any and all purposes then I have no problems with that. It's none of my business. The way I see it is that this type of license would only be good if you were a salary paid employee and you were creating in house apps for the business. Outside of that or RandD work I just don't get the fanboyism it receives.
I've always liked PC-BSD and enjoy checking out other BSD distros. What I don't like is the fanboy attitude that you sometimes get from the community. Of course you can get that from any community be it Linux, MS, Apple, Oracle, Sony, and the list goes on. With the license issues involved, no wonder the average person stays confused. GPL licensing will only be a nightmare if a person want to close up the code works completely. BSD license.....well no one really cares, why should they? It's for the benefit of the world.
P.S. These are just my opinions and not meant to be offensive to anyone.
60 • Licensing (by Jesse on 2012-01-26 21:40:53 GMT from Canada)
@59:
>> " With the license issues involved, no wonder the average person stays confused. GPL licensing will only be a nightmare if a person want to close up the code works completely. "
I agreed with most of the post in 59, with the exception of this above bit. Dealing with the GPL can be problematic, even in cases where the company isn't trying to close source their products, because of the restrictions involved. For example, ZFS is open source, the Linux kernel is open source, but the GPL is too restrictive to allow a native ZFS module in the kernel. That's a big problem for people who want a modern file system in a Linux shop. Projects using the BSD license don't have that problem and it's been a huge asset for them.
It's not just GPL vs other licenses either, the GPLv2 and GPLv3 aren't compatible. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#v2v3Compatibility
This means you if have a project licensed under the GPLv2 and there's a similar project out there licensed under the GPLv3, you can't import their code. Let's say you're maintaining a LTS release (like Red Hat or Ubuntu) and you ship with code under GPLv2 and the upstream projects switches to GPLv3 (as some did a few years back), you can't backport new bug fixes or features from the GPLv3 branch into your product without changing the license. If you create a program under the GPLv2 and find a library out there which would greatly improve your project and it's licensed GPLv3, you can't use it without changing your license... which can be tricky if, like most open source projects, you don't demand developers sign over the rights to their code.
The BSD style of license is attractive to a lot of developers because it doesn't come with these sorts of problems. I'm not saying it's a better or worse situation, just that it doesn't have the restrictions. GPL, for all its great efforts to support code freedom, brings its own problems to the table.
61 • BSD versus GPL (by JR on 2012-01-27 01:50:43 GMT from Brazil)
pasting a comment from the past:
"155 • GPL X BSD licence (by JR on 2011-12-31 19:04:08 GMT from Brazil)
freedom of the code itself is one thing, freedom of the person who uses the code is something else!
Although it is just my opinion, I think the issue is important:
The BSD license gives freedom to the person who reuses the code ... GPL gives freedom to the code itself ... both are free, depends only on what or who you want to be free.
The discussion shows that the two licenses are incompatible.
A BSD code can be "closed", ie, the new developer (that is reusing code) is free to make a new product without returning this code to the community ..... (if this is good or bad is another matter)
A GPL code must remain open, so he (the developer) is not totally free, but the code is .... (if this is good or bad is another matter as well)
You all are not right or wrong, just need to choose which kind of freedom you want, we can not have everything."
62 • BSD versus GPL (by Koroshiya Itchy on 2012-01-27 11:24:32 GMT from Belgium)
The problem I see with the BSD license might not be a big one in a perfect world, but it is a problem in this world. The problem is that a corporation can take your code, modify it, incorporate it in some complex work-flow, protect it and then sue you for using it. In a way, this is happening and this can happen because, as compared to the average citizen, the big corporations have unlimited time and resources and they have the best lawyers and so they can exhaust anybody with a very long trial even if that anybody is right. So even if, in theory, the BSD license should prevent this kind of situations from occurring, in practice, it does not, because we are in a state of defencelessness.
63 • Tiny Core (by DJ on 2012-01-27 11:51:49 GMT from Germany)
I think here is something everyone should know;
When getting started with the Core Project you have 3 different download options: Core, TinyCore, and CorePlus. TinyCore and CorePlus are simply Core plus additional extensions.
TinyCore (12 MB) - This is the recommended option for new users who have a wired network connection. It includes the base Core system plus extensions for a FLWM graphical desktop environment.
CorePlus (48 MB) - This is the recommended option for new users who only have a wireless network connection or who use a non-US keyboard layout. It includes the base Core System and extensions to provide the following: 6 Window Manager options, Wireless support, an installer, non-US keyboard support, and a remastering tool.
Core (8 MB) - This the base system which includes a command line interface only by default and is recommended for experienced users only. Additional extensions can be added to create a system with a graphical desktop environment.
64 • #10.. (by Vakkotaur on 2012-01-27 12:46:00 GMT from United States)
I had meant to thank you for mentioning that Pardus would run on A6 video without the annoyingly common blackscreen (that *buntu gets, that Fedroa-derived things get, that... you know.) But now I wonder what sort of hairy mess I've gotten into.
The install seemed to go well. The integrity check passed. The only initial worry as that the PCLinuxOS (32 bit) partition wasn't recognized and the boot suggests it's Windows (on ext4?!). But that could be fixed (though I haven't yet.) Then the file permissions were wrong to let KDE start. So I chowned .ICEauthority and tried again. Evident success... if I log in by picking a specific KDE at startup and NOT "default". So I try Xfce... and it refuses to work and I get thrown back to the login screen. Meanwhile I do get the video drivers (and Pardus does seem to be only time I've seen Catalyst work as it seems it should). I know, ask on the forum... I have a list of things for that (middle button emulation & 32-bit compatibility are the big two just now) I've found a lot of files seem to have oddly unusable permissions.. That really doesn't make sense to me, for a new install of what should be a stable release.
I want to like Pardus, but it feels very "almost" to me. It _almost_ works. This is on a Toshiba Satellite L755-S5104 laptop, so swappingout hardware isn't a real option.
65 • Pristine state of Tinycore after each reboot (by TC-user on 2012-01-27 21:13:30 GMT from Australia)
From 27: "The pristine state after each reboot is a major feature of Tinycore, and should have been mentioned."
I think most people don't understand how Tinycore works, or know it is any different from any other operating system.
To explain it another way: The Tinycore operating system and apps are installed read-only. Personal files and settings can be saved, but operating system and app files are not modified.
As a result, it is very unlikely for the filesystem to become corrupted. If Tinycore works first time, it will work every time.
66 • @65,27 (by Pearson on 2012-01-27 21:23:03 GMT from United States)
While haveing the OS "readonly" is a good feature, how is this different from various other live distributions?
67 • readonly OS @66 (by Julian on 2012-01-28 01:28:46 GMT from United States)
"While haveing the OS "readonly" is a good feature, how is this different from various other live distributions?"
You can install packages, add files, etc... but due to the modular design of TinyCore the underlying OS is just a file (or a few files) sitting on your hard drive (while the stuff you've changed or added sit in another file). So you can just delete the "changes" file and you're back to where you started, or you can keep the "changes" file and delete the OS.
68 • Bodhi and Bloathi (by forlin on 2012-01-28 13:47:54 GMT from Portugal)
Samsung, the powerful Enlightenment patron, is not interested at all about the E17 desktop environment. The direct consequence is that Rasterman, the Enlightenment founder, is currently developing it himself, but almost alone. E17 just works, but it's not progressing a inch.
Bodhi appeared at a time when there was almost any decent E17 Linux distro.
Strong ambition and the users wish for a good E17 distro, were the basis for its meteoric success.
Unfortunately, Bodhi founder is not is not the kind of a Judd Vinet person. He says he can't even program, and (excluding mediocre PR) showed little to none interest about promoting E17 from inside Bodhi.
I see his kind of ambition as one driven by the wish to be in the spotlight, and he did very well on that.
The problem is about the Bodhi future. It's tied to the E17 future and considering the current panorama, chances are in 10 years, Bodhi will be just at where it is today.
More or less Bloathi will not change that.
69 • @67 & 66 (by Antonio on 2012-01-28 15:47:08 GMT from United States)
Slax could do this very well. Since its new version has yet to be released there is Porteus which does this well from any live media. Also some friends have used Puppy have done this well. The differences can be the size. It depends on what you want as a user. While Slax and Porteus are bigger, they have full fledged desktops like KDE, or at your option remove it and keep only lxde and make it smaller. You can use the system with copy2ram and save no changes as well. System works really great.
70 • 62 • BSD versus GPL (by jack on 2012-01-29 02:39:06 GMT from Canada)
LINUS:BSD. GPLv2.GPLv3
Linus: I think there's both a licence issue, and a community and personality issue. The BSD licences always encouraged forking, but also meant that if somebody gets really successful and makes a commercial fork, you cannot necessarily join back. And so even if that doesn't actually happen (and it did, in the BSD cases -- with BSDi), people can't really 'trust' each other as much.
In contrast, the GPLv2 also encourages forking, but it not only encourages the branching off part, it also encourages (and 'requires') the ability to merge back again. So now you have a whole new level of trust: you 'know' that everybody involved will be bound by the licence, and won't try to take advantage of you.
So I see the GPLv2 as the licence that allows people the maximum possible freedom within the requirement that you can always join back together again from either side. Nobody can stop you from taking the improvements to the source code.
So is the BSD licence even more 'free'? Yes. Unquestionably. But I just wouldn't want to use the BSD licence for any project I care about, because I not only want the freedom, I also want the trust so that I can always use the code that others write for my projects.
So to me, the GPLv2 ends up being a wonderful balance of 'as free as you can make it', considering that I do want everybody to be able to trust so that they can always get the source code and use it.
Which is why I think the GPLv3 ends up being a much less interesting licence. It's no longer about that trust about "getting the source code back"; it has degenerated into a "I wrote the code, so I should be able to control how you use it."
In other words, I just think the GPLv3 is too petty and selfish. I think the GPLv2 has a great balance between 'freedom' and 'trust'. It's not as free as the BSD licences are, but it gives you peace of mind in return, and matches what I consider 'tit-for-tat': I give source code, you give me source code in return.
The GPLv3 tries to control the 'use' of that source code. Now it's, "I give you my source code, so if you use it, you'd better make your devices hackable by me." See? Petty and small-minded, in my opinion.
http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/08/19/1246236.shtml
71 • Too tiny to be good (by Walter Heidorn on 2012-01-29 19:51:15 GMT from Brazil)
Caitlyn wrote: "I definitely agree that CorePlus makes Tiny Core much more useful. The result is very similar to what Damn Small Linux was"
What? DSL is way better than TC. And it has web-browsers out of the box...
Not including at least "Dillo patched" in TC is ridiculous, a silly decision just to make it tinier than DSL (but definitely not as useful as DSL).
SliTaz makes TC a very bad choice!
72 • TC derivative (by Neal on 2012-01-29 20:12:37 GMT from United States)
I would like to see a complete TC derivative that would be more like the old DSL.....But as of now if I'm playing with older hardware I head to Wary....Its just more complete out of the box.
So....I will gladly welcome a OS derivative around 90mb or slightly less based on Tiny Core......wireless support would be a big plus.
73 • @71, TinyCore and DSL (by TobiSGD on 2012-01-29 21:03:22 GMT from Germany)
"What? DSL is way better than TC. And it has web-browsers out of the box..."
Tinycore and DSL have totally different approaches. While DSL wanted to be a tiny but somewhat complete desktop, Tinycore wants to be a a very small base for a system you build yourself. Only thing they have in common is that they run from RAM. You simply can't compare them. Saying that DSL is better than Tinycore because it has a web browser out of the box would be the same as saying that Arch is inferior to Ubuntu because it doesn't even come with X out of the box. That is simply not it's goal.
"Not including at least "Dillo patched" in TC is ridiculous, a silly decision just to make it tinier than DSL (but definitely not as useful as DSL)."
Again, you missed totally the point. The goal of Tinycore is not to be smaller than DSL. The goal is to deliver a small base to build up your system on it. It is not meant to be a complete system out of the box.
And there is a (in my eyes very important) advantage for Tinycore in comparison to DSL: It is still supported and developed.
74 • @73 (by JR on 2012-01-29 23:59:03 GMT from Brazil)
the comparison was made by Caitlyn, the author of the post 71 just disagreed of what she said
Number of Comments: 74
Display mode: DWW Only • Comments Only • Both DWW and Comments
| | |
| TUXEDO |
TUXEDO Computers - Linux Hardware in a tailor made suite
Choose from a wide range of laptops and PCs in various sizes and shapes at TUXEDOComputers.com. Every machine comes pre-installed and ready-to-run with Linux. Full 24 months of warranty and lifetime support included!
Learn more about our full service package and all benefits from buying at TUXEDO.
|
| Archives |
| • Issue 1146 (2025-11-03): StartOS 0.4.0, testing piped commands, Ubuntu Unity seeks help, Canonical offers Ubuntu credentials, Red Hat partners with NVIDIA, SUSE to bundle AI agent with SLE 16 |
| • Issue 1145 (2025-10-27): Linux Mint 7 "LMDE", advice for new Linux users, AlmaLinux to offer Btrfs, KDE launches Plasma 6.5, Fedora accepts contributions written by AI, Ubuntu 25.10 fails to install automatic updates |
| • Issue 1144 (2025-10-20): Kubuntu 25.10, creating and restoring encrypted backups, Fedora team debates AI, FSF plans free software for phones, ReactOS addresses newer drivers, Xubuntu reacts to website attack |
| • Issue 1143 (2025-10-13): openSUSE 16.0 Leap, safest source for new applications, Redox introduces performance improvements, TrueNAS Connect available for testing, Flatpaks do not work on Ubuntu 25.10, Kamarada plans to switch its base, Solus enters new epoch, Frugalware discontinued |
| • Issue 1142 (2025-10-06): Linux Kamarada 15.6, managing ZIP files with SQLite, F-Droid warns of impact of Android lockdown, Alpine moves ahead with merged /usr, Cinnamon gets a redesigned application menu |
| • Issue 1141 (2025-09-29): KDE Linux and GNOME OS, finding mobile flavours of Linux, Murena to offer phones with kill switches, Redox OS running on a smartphone, Artix drops GNOME |
| • Issue 1140 (2025-09-22): NetBSD 10.1, avoiding AI services, AlmaLinux enables CRB repository, Haiku improves disk access performance, Mageia addresses service outage, GNOME 49 released, Linux introduces multikernel support |
| • Issue 1139 (2025-09-15): EasyOS 7.0, Linux and central authority, FreeBSD running Plasma 6 on Wayland, GNOME restores X11 support temporarily, openSUSE dropping BCacheFS in new kernels |
| • Issue 1138 (2025-09-08): Shebang 25.8, LibreELEC 12.2.0, Debian GNU/Hurd 2025, the importance of software updates, AerynOS introduces package sets, postmarketOS encourages patching upstream, openSUSE extends Leap support, Debian refreshes Trixie media |
| • Issue 1137 (2025-09-01): Tribblix 0m37, malware scanners flagging Linux ISO files, KDE introduces first-run setup wizard, CalyxOS plans update prior to infrastructure overhaul, FreeBSD publishes status report |
| • Issue 1136 (2025-08-25): CalyxOS 6.8.20, distros for running containers, Arch Linux website under attack,illumos Cafe launched, CachyOS creates web dashboard for repositories |
| • Issue 1135 (2025-08-18): Debian 13, Proton, WINE, Wayland, and Wayback, Debian GNU/Hurd 2025, KDE gets advanced Liquid Glass, Haiku improves authentication tools |
| • Issue 1134 (2025-08-11): Rhino Linux 2025.3, thoughts on malware in the AUR, Fedora brings hammered websites back on-line, NetBSD reveals features for version 11, Ubuntu swaps some command line tools for 25.10, AlmaLinux improves NVIDIA support |
| • Issue 1133 (2025-08-04): Expirion Linux 6.0, running Plasma on Linux Mint, finding distros which support X11, Debian addresses 22 year old bug, FreeBSD discusses potential issues with pkgbase, CDE ported to OpenBSD, Btrfs corruption bug hitting Fedora users, more malware found in Arch User Repository |
| • Issue 1132 (2025-07-28): deepin 25, wars in the open source community, proposal to have Fedora enable Flathub repository, FreeBSD plans desktop install option, Wayback gets its first release |
| • Issue 1131 (2025-07-21): HeliumOS 10.0, settling on one distro, Mint plans new releases, Arch discovers malware in AUR, Plasma Bigscreen returns, Clear Linux discontinued |
| • Issue 1130 (2025-07-14): openSUSE MicroOS and RefreshOS, sharing aliases between computers, Bazzite makes Bazaar its default Flatpak store, Alpine plans Wayback release, Wayland and X11 benchmarked, Red Hat offers additional developer licenses, openSUSE seeks feedback from ARM users, Ubuntu 24.10 reaches the end of its life |
| • Issue 1129 (2025-07-07): GLF OS Omnislash, the worst Linux distro, Alpine introduces Wayback, Fedora drops plans to stop i686 support, AlmaLinux builds EPEL repository for older CPUs, Ubuntu dropping existing RISC-V device support, Rhino partners with UBports, PCLinuxOS recovering from website outage |
| • Issue 1128 (2025-06-30): AxOS 25.06, AlmaLinux OS 10.0, transferring Flaptak bundles to off-line computers, Ubuntu to boost Intel graphics performance, Fedora considers dropping i686 packages, SDesk switches from SELinux to AppArmor |
| • Issue 1127 (2025-06-23): LastOSLinux 2025-05-25, most unique Linux distro, Haiku stabilises, KDE publishes Plasma 6.4, Arch splits Plasma packages, Slackware infrastructure migrating |
| • Issue 1126 (2025-06-16): SDesk 2025.05.06, renewed interest in Ubuntu Touch, a BASIC device running NetBSD, Ubuntu dropping X11 GNOME session, GNOME increases dependency on systemd, Google holding back Pixel source code, Nitrux changing its desktop, EFF turns 35 |
| • Issue 1125 (2025-06-09): RHEL 10, distributions likely to survive a decade, Murena partners with more hardware makers, GNOME tests its own distro on real hardware, Redox ports GTK and X11, Mint provides fingerprint authentication |
| • Issue 1124 (2025-06-02): Picking up a Pico, tips for protecting privacy, Rhino tests Plasma desktop, Arch installer supports snapshots, new features from UBports, Ubuntu tests monthly snapshots |
| • Issue 1123 (2025-05-26): CRUX 3.8, preventing a laptop from sleeping, FreeBSD improves laptop support, Fedora confirms GNOME X11 session being dropped, HardenedBSD introduces Rust in userland build, KDE developing a virtual machine manager |
| • Issue 1122 (2025-05-19): GoboLinux 017.01, RHEL 10.0 and Debian 12 updates, openSUSE retires YaST, running X11 apps on Wayland |
| • Issue 1121 (2025-05-12): Bluefin 41, custom file manager actions, openSUSE joins End of 10 while dropping Deepin desktop, Fedora offers tips for building atomic distros, Ubuntu considers replacing sudo with sudo-rs |
| • Issue 1120 (2025-05-05): CachyOS 250330, what it means when a distro breaks, Kali updates repository key, Trinity receives an update, UBports tests directory encryption, Gentoo faces losing key infrastructure |
| • Issue 1119 (2025-04-28): Ubuntu MATE 25.04, what is missing from Linux, CachyOS ships OCCT, Debian enters soft freeze, Fedora discusses removing X11 session from GNOME, Murena plans business services, NetBSD on a Wii |
| • Issue 1118 (2025-04-21): Fedora 42, strange characters in Vim, Nitrux introduces new package tools, Fedora extends reproducibility efforts, PINE64 updates multiple devices running Debian |
| • Issue 1117 (2025-04-14): Shebang 25.0, EndeavourOS 2025.03.19, running applications from other distros on the desktop, Debian gets APT upgrade, Mint introduces OEM options for LMDE, postmarketOS packages GNOME 48 and COSMIC, Redox testing USB support |
| • Issue 1116 (2025-04-07): The Sense HAT, Android and mobile operating systems, FreeBSD improves on laptops, openSUSE publishes many new updates, Fedora appoints new Project Leader, UBports testing VoLTE |
| • Issue 1115 (2025-03-31): GrapheneOS 2025, the rise of portable package formats, MidnightBSD and openSUSE experiment with new package management features, Plank dock reborn, key infrastructure projects lose funding, postmarketOS to focus on reliability |
| • Issue 1114 (2025-03-24): Bazzite 41, checking which processes are writing to disk, Rocky unveils new Hardened branch, GNOME 48 released, generating images for the Raspberry Pi |
| • Issue 1113 (2025-03-17): MocaccinoOS 1.8.1, how to contribute to open source, Murena extends on-line installer, Garuda tests COSMIC edition, Ubuntu to replace coreutils with Rust alternatives, Chimera Linux drops RISC-V builds |
| • Issue 1112 (2025-03-10): Solus 4.7, distros which work with Secure Boot, UBports publishes bug fix, postmarketOS considers a new name, Debian running on Android |
| • Issue 1111 (2025-03-03): Orbitiny 0.01, the effect of Ubuntu Core Desktop, Gentoo offers disk images, elementary OS invites feature ideas, FreeBSD starts PinePhone Pro port, Mint warns of upcoming Firefox issue |
| • Issue 1110 (2025-02-24): iodeOS 6.0, learning to program, Arch retiring old repositories, openSUSE makes progress on reproducible builds, Fedora is getting more serious about open hardware, Tails changes its install instructions to offer better privacy, Murena's de-Googled tablet goes on sale |
| • Issue 1109 (2025-02-17): Rhino Linux 2025.1, MX Linux 23.5 with Xfce 4.20, replacing X.Org tools with Wayland tools, GhostBSD moving its base to FreeBSD -RELEASE, Redox stabilizes its ABI, UBports testing 24.04, Asahi changing its leadership, OBS in dispute with Fedora |
| • Issue 1108 (2025-02-10): Serpent OS 0.24.6, Aurora, sharing swap between distros, Peppermint tries Void base, GTK removinglegacy technologies, Red Hat plans more AI tools for Fedora, TrueNAS merges its editions |
| • Issue 1107 (2025-02-03): siduction 2024.1.0, timing tasks, Lomiri ported to postmarketOS, Alpine joins Open Collective, a new desktop for Linux called Orbitiny |
| • Issue 1106 (2025-01-27): Adelie Linux 1.0 Beta 6, Pop!_OS 24.04 Alpha 5, detecting whether a process is inside a virtual machine, drawing graphics to NetBSD terminal, Nix ported to FreeBSD, GhostBSD hosting desktop conference |
| • Issue 1105 (2025-01-20): CentOS 10 Stream, old Flatpak bundles in software centres, Haiku ports Iceweasel, Oracle shows off debugging tools, rsync vulnerability patched |
| • Issue 1104 (2025-01-13): DAT Linux 2.0, Silly things to do with a minimal computer, Budgie prepares Wayland only releases, SteamOS coming to third-party devices, Murena upgrades its base |
| • Issue 1103 (2025-01-06): elementary OS 8.0, filtering ads with Pi-hole, Debian testing its installer, Pop!_OS faces delays, Ubuntu Studio upgrades not working, Absolute discontinued |
| • Issue 1102 (2024-12-23): Best distros of 2024, changing a process name, Fedora to expand Btrfs support and releases Asahi Remix 41, openSUSE patches out security sandbox and donations from Bottles while ending support for Leap 15.5 |
| • Issue 1101 (2024-12-16): GhostBSD 24.10.1, sending attachments from the command line, openSUSE shows off GPU assignment tool, UBports publishes security update, Murena launches its first tablet, Xfce 4.20 released |
| • Issue 1100 (2024-12-09): Oreon 9.3, differences in speed, IPFire's new appliance, Fedora Asahi Remix gets new video drivers, openSUSE Leap Micro updated, Redox OS running Redox OS |
| • Issue 1099 (2024-12-02): AnduinOS 1.0.1, measuring RAM usage, SUSE continues rebranding efforts, UBports prepares for next major version, Murena offering non-NFC phone |
| • Issue 1098 (2024-11-25): Linux Lite 7.2, backing up specific folders, Murena and Fairphone partner in fair trade deal, Arch installer gets new text interface, Ubuntu security tool patched |
| • Issue 1097 (2024-11-18): Chimera Linux vs Chimera OS, choosing between AlmaLinux and Debian, Fedora elevates KDE spin to an edition, Fedora previews new installer, KDE testing its own distro, Qubes-style isolation coming to FreeBSD |
| • Issue 1096 (2024-11-11): Bazzite 40, Playtron OS Alpha 1, Tucana Linux 3.1, detecting Screen sessions, Redox imports COSMIC software centre, FreeBSD booting on the PinePhone Pro, LXQt supports Wayland window managers |
| • Issue 1095 (2024-11-04): Fedora 41 Kinoite, transferring applications between computers, openSUSE Tumbleweed receives multiple upgrades, Ubuntu testing compiler optimizations, Mint partners with Framework |
| • Full list of all issues |
| Star Labs |
Star Labs - Laptops built for Linux.
View our range including the highly anticipated StarFighter. Available with coreboot open-source firmware and a choice of Ubuntu, elementary, Manjaro and more. Visit Star Labs for information, to buy and get support.
|
| Random Distribution | 
Namib GNU/Linux
Namib GNU/Linux was a desktop operating system based on (and compatible with) the Arch Linux distribution. Namib was available in multiple desktop editions and can be set up using the Calamares system installer.
Status: Discontinued
|
| TUXEDO |
TUXEDO Computers - Linux Hardware in a tailor made suite
Choose from a wide range of laptops and PCs in various sizes and shapes at TUXEDOComputers.com. Every machine comes pre-installed and ready-to-run with Linux. Full 24 months of warranty and lifetime support included!
Learn more about our full service package and all benefits from buying at TUXEDO.
|
| Star Labs |
Star Labs - Laptops built for Linux.
View our range including the highly anticipated StarFighter. Available with coreboot open-source firmware and a choice of Ubuntu, elementary, Manjaro and more. Visit Star Labs for information, to buy and get support.
|
|
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
