Hello from Dragora!
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires
I am posting this from Dragora GNU/Linux-libre. Hello!
I was wondering, what do you consider to be the strengths and weaknesses of Trisquel vs gNewSense vs Dragora vs Parabola vs other FSF approved? I am not trying to start a flame or holy war, just some information that could guide GNU/Linux users on the best path.
I'll start first.
Parabola is if you like to have the bleeding edge of everything, and want to configure your environment yourself.
Trisquel is no-nonsense for home & work. Works out of the box, if you're into that sort of thing.
gNewSense is Trisquel, but more stable and tested. Use this if you want to change as infrequently as possible, need a stable workstation, or run a server.
Ututo is if you want to configure everything to the n-th degree.
Dragora is for users wanting a simple, very UNIX-ish desktop or workstation to do development, Emacs, etc.
Musix and dyne:bolic if you are a musician that is into dormant distros.
BLAG if you want an RPM Trisquel.
I haven't tested blag neither dragora but I have opinions concerning Trisquel, gnewsense and Parabola:
Parabola is ideal for a person who needs the latest packages avaliable, and they are mostly vanilla. Being on the edge have its drawbacks like the fact that the system is more prone to brake in comparison to Gnewsense and Trisquel, but I can say that Parabola is surprisingly stable.
Trisquel is somewhere between gnewsense and Parabola in terms of stability and packages avaliable. One of the main advantages Trisquel have over the others is the fact that there are a lot of customize packages made by the team behind the project like the compton package, the custom Gnome desktop with notify-osd enabled, orca, ubiquity, plymouth, Abrowser, icecat and a lot more. Not only that but it is more secure than Ubuntu, have better defaults and, oh goodness, it even have better design than the distro it comes from. Well, I couldn't hide my enthusiasm and I compared with Ubuntu because I feel it's more than just a copy with some packages removed.
Gnewsense si very close to Debian, sadly, it almost does not have diferences with the distro it comes from not counting the fact it have scripts that make esier the maintenance easier. Stability is its main advantage.
Agreed. I used Parabola for a while, but it was an overkill for my machine, which I use mostly for Emacs and stuff. I now web browse on a Trisquel desktop and use Dragora without a GUI on my laptop.
I made a mistake, I wrote brake instead fo break... Oh my, sorry english I didn't mean to.
And I want to ask you if you use emacs without a GUI on Dragora. And which version is installed by default on that distro.
It's funny because emacs should be used mostly by programming and I use it as a calculator, basic spreadsheet, and file management but no programing (writting html documents count as programing?).
Emacs is not installed by default, but the plus CD is an iso you can get from their sourceforge that has Emacs 23.something and other goodies. Dragora doesn't have an 'official' repository, but there are user ones. I saw that one repo had the new Emacs, but not for my architecture. I just noted that would be something I have to do, and I went on the dragora IRC, just casually notes that the Emacs package is only for i486, and the maintainer of the repo made an x86_64 package for me! That was so sweet!
There is the "ultimate" free GNU/Linux-libre distro, GNU Guix. Try it, it's great!
Seconded. It's not 'complete' (Hence why it's not on the FSF-approved distro list), but it's still great. Not the most user-friendly distro, so don't hand a CD out to a friend unfamiliar with GNU/Linux.
(I'm in the dust, sorry- the package manager and the Guix distribution are fantastic, but I never really found out *WHY* the Nix package manager was forked to make Guix. Could someone fill me in?)
Guix is hackable in Guile/Scheme, versatile (reliable & less prone to package management problems), etc. I think it was hackability mostly. If your entire system is configurable in the best programming language in the world (Lisp), this will encourage people to work on it more. And RMS is/was a Lisp hacker, so...
I think another outlook could be:
If you like Ubuntu but want a Libre version then Trisquel is for you, or if you want newer but not the latest software.
If you want the bleeding edge, or close to it then Parabola.
But, if you do not trust Ubuntu or Canonical, and prefer stability over newer software then gNewSense is great. Also, if you have Yeelong or MIPS architecture, then gNewSense for sure.
gNewSense 4.0 is in alpha stage based on Wheezy 7.0.
In my opinion the bigger difference among fully free distributions is support (closely related to community size) and release cycle. See also https://trisquel.info/en/forum/technical-advantages-trisquel-over-debian. Only Trisquel and Parabola seem to have a sizeable community. I think that it's a pity that some volunteers are wasting their time with gNewSense 4.0 because Debian 7 has already very old software, and it's going to become superseded by the next Debian release soon, so the software in gNewSense is going to be deprecated since its release.
I am a translator!
exactly - it'll be old from the very beginning. but stable..
:)
gnewsense 4 will be great for servers aslong as it gets security updates
and also i think one of the advantages of gnewsense is it runs on MIPS computers not something it know alot about but if you have one of those computers gnewsense may be your only libre option
Using this thinking, then all of the lesser GNU/Linix distros should abandon ship and only support the largest 3, 4 or 5 distos?
gNewSense is not deprecated, 4.0 is based on Debian 7, and has backports etc... When 4.0 is up, then work will start immediately on 5.0 based on Deb. 8.
There are alot of people that do not like Canonical etc... and would prefer a more stable and free base system. The concern with Ubuntu derivatives is they are all dependent on whatever direction Canonical and Shuttleworth go.
So if you do not like Canonical, then their are alternatives. The strength in GNU/Linix is its diversity, the more projects the stronger the community becomes. Otherwise we delve into the realms of Microsoft and Apple and only repeat their mistakes!
"The strength in GNU/Linix is its diversity, the more projects the stronger the community becomes. Otherwise we delve into the realms of Microsoft and Apple and only repeat their mistakes!"
I agree too few options lead to monopoly, but I don't think that more projects equals stronger community. If there's a lot of projects with not enough developers and/or supporters, they become (for the lack of a better word) weaker. Things are best when they are balanced. Diversity is fantastic, but not when it means mediocre options (hypothetically; I'm not pointing fingers here).
Personally, I'd love to see a few more libre distro options, but if that would mean the division of current developer+community of Trisquel into (let's say) 3 distros, I would have my doubts regarding their futures.
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires