PeppermintOS ditching Ubuntu base for Debian/Devuan - Trisquel should also
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires
PeppermintOS has stopped basing on Ubuntu because they no longer like the Ubuntu design decisions. Trisquel should think about doing the same, allowing Trisquel to avoid snaps and to offer 32-bit again:
>“We collectively agreed with the admins team to drop Ubuntu, due to the direction they have taken,” says Peppermint developer Cavy. “I have seen all arguments for and against this switch. I genuinely believe this to be the optimum move in Peppermint’s evolutionally development.”
Info and links from my internet friend ManyRoads, as posted on the Devuan forum:
>"For those who care about such things...
"A formerUbuntu distro is about to offer both Debian and soon Devuan based releases.
"PeppermintOS is expanding and building on Devuan (no-systemd), as well.
https://mastodon.technology/web/statuse … 5732164397
"New PeppermintOS release write-up on Forbes:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevang … a556aa328a
"Pax vobiscum,
Mark Rabideau - ManyRoads
i3wm, dwm WM ~ Reg. Linux User #449130
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken
when trisquel is made, there is no cooperation between
ubuntu and trisquel staff? Trisquel people take
an ubuntu version and turn it into trisquel? Trisquel
staff cannot reach out to debian and together find a
way such that debian would facilitate a faster and
easier road turning debian into trisquel?
The reason I do not
install trisquel is, that for instance trisquel is now
at version 10. But debian is at version 11. And there
have been discussions about trisquel not being able
to get updates ready fast enough. I would also want to know,
why it is better to make both trisquel and guix? Instead
of directing all resources to only one of them?
The Trisquel project takes Ubuntu's packages (Ubuntu's default system does not matter), in the main and universe sections, clean them and make a distribution out of the resulting repository: https://trisquel.info/en/wiki/how-trisquel-made
The reason I do not install trisquel is, that for instance trisquel is now
at version 10. But debian is at version 11.
Those numbers cannot be compared in any meaningful way.
why it is better to make both trisquel and guix?
They are vastly different projects. Maybe most importantly, Guix is a rolling-release distributions, whereas Trisquel is stable, and Guix targets advanced users, whereas Trisquel aims for user-friendliness.
"Those numbers cannot be compared in any meaningful way."
Indeed! The Incompatible Timesharing System, which was written for the discontinued PDP-10 mainframe computer, was (I think) at version 1648 or something like that. With such a large number clearly it's even better. :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incompatible_Timesharing_System
Ubuntu is nearly twice as powerful as Debian, because Ubuntu is on version 21.10, and Debian is stuck all the way back at version 11.
Slackware is kind of in the middle between them in terms of power and performance, because it is on version 15.
True. Hence my preference for Libre-antiX 21.
Talking about which, I think we need a naming tradition. Metal Rat was suggested some time ago, but I believe it follows the Chinese calendar too strictly not to look suspicious to the more superstitious among us.
There's always "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn". We could see if it causes Cthulhu to arise bodily from his underwater dwelling in the South Pacific to fight Hastur the Unspeakable.
Plus, when you go to nerd parties and the cool dudes try to impress everyone with "I use Arch", you could blow them out of the water with, "well I use Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn".
> "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn"
Shouldn't that be the vocative "Ph'nglui mglw'nafhkh Cthulhugh R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn"?
Fateful mistake. Vocative it was. I can see Cthulhu's tonsils already.
What about Fedora 35 then? :-D
>"What about Fedora 35 then? :-D"
Only about 1/3 as powerful as Google Chrome 99.0. And Chrome is 1.0 more powerful than Firefox 98.0.
> cannot be compared
Then how do you verify if
trisquel is keeping up on updates?
> different projects
maybe free software people should conclude, that financing
two systems is one to much. Instead select one of them
and allocate all resources toward the selected system.
Firefox is version 97.0. Appimage librewolf is 97.0. Abrowser
is 96.0.
>"Appimage librewolf is 97.0. Abrowser
is 96.0."
Not a good comparison - abrowser's updates usually arrive faster than LibreWolf's. And version 97 is a feature update release, not a security release, so it's better to put it through some testing prior to release.
> Maybe most importantly,
The most important difference I think is Guix is an "everything-is-in-a-container" system, whereas Trisquel is not. Gives and takes with both. I don't really enjoy containers for my own systems, but acknowledge their place.
I've often thought that as GNU should call GUIX the Incompatible GNU System, and make some Debian/Fedora-esque system and call it the Compatible GNU System. Alas.
I am a translator!
> Guix is an "everything-is-in-a-container" system
I am not familiar enough with Guix but I thought that, every user using a single profile and updating all already installed packages before installing a new package, I mean guix pull and guix package update (which looks a bit like apt update and apt upgrade, or pacman -Syu) would have an environment in which all apps will use the same version of libraries. Is it not so?
Probably you can play more complicated things but I would assume that only people who know exactly what they are doing would try that. I personally wouldn't unless it looks like the only way to solve a problem and I am reasonably confident that I understand what I am doing.
"would have an environment in which all apps will use the same version of libraries. Is it not so?"
Not necessarily. One thing about Guix is that because of the design you can install apps that need different library versions. Or even incompatible library versions. They get installed without issue.
"Probably you can play more complicated things but I would assume that only people who know exactly what they are doing would try that."
It's not even that. You'd just tell Guix to install the app that you want and it will take care of the dependencies so someone may arrive in that case where they have multiple different and incompatible library versions installed without even knowing that that has happened. But all of their apps "just work" so they don't even need to know that this is happening.
I am a translator!
I am using Debian 11 on my desktop due to frequent freezes with Trisquel 9 or 10. I use Trisquel 10 on my laptops.
On Debian 11, I see firefox-esr 91.6 (no other version) and Libreoffice v7.0-4.4.
On Trisquel 10, I have abrowser 96.0 and Libreoffice v7.2.5~rc2.
I use Guix on Trisquel and Debian. I use mostly Gajim from Guix. Debian version is 1.3.1-1, Trisquel version is 1.1.3-2, Guix version is 1.3.3. On Trisquel 9 and on Debian 11, shield icons for OMEMO are impossible to distinguish between "verified" "trusted" or "untrusted". On Trisquel 10, there is no such problem.
I joined Guix help list, Guix system looks too complicated, so I continue with Guix on Trisquel/Debian.
I use one PPA for Ubuntu but unfortunately, it does not work on Debian. For x86, it seems to me there is more support for Ubuntu that for Debian, and it is usually applicable with Trisquel, so this is some advantage.
So I am not sure it is better to base Trisquel on Debian than on Ubuntu. Still, I have one problem: I find it a bit difficult to find support for Mate, which I use on Trisquel and Debian.
Yeah, maybe we need two libre distros - Trisquel for 64 bit, and Libre-antiX for 32 bit, or something like that. If we aren't going to have Trisquel 32-bit available going forward, we are going to have to do something. Too many people have 32-bit machines, we can't just leave them with nothing
> Too many people have 32-bit machines
Let's not forget all the other exotic architectures, like Alpha or Sparc.
> when trisquel is made, there is no cooperation between
ubuntu and trisquel staff?
Friendly reminder that Canonical shut down Gobuntu in order to help gNewSense:
It probably isn't my business, but in general, I begin to wonder something...
Which is harder, deblobbing ubuntu?
or, making a debian based distro that is user friendly/libre?
Hmm...
But yeah, I would think Andy's first post on this thread is probably a wise move, regardless of if it will happen...
Which Jxself seems to say that is an absolute no.
Might be good, might be bad...
Depends on the difficulty of both of the above questions, which is harder, which is easier... which is better, etc...
I am going to guess, no unless ubuntu screws itself up more in the future...
;)
> Which is harder, deblobbing ubuntu? or, making a debian based distro that is user friendly/libre?
Making a debian based distro that is user friendly. The software freedom problems with both distros are specific and knowable and straightforward to address, especially with Trisquel's infrastructure of "Helper" programs to automate that. Given that the freedom problems can be automated away, and would in fact be automated regardless of whether it's a Debian or Ubuntu base because that's a more efficient and more fool-proof way of dealing with them, the amount of freedom problems is almost irrelevant.But Ubuntu has the added benefit that Canonical has already done all of the work to make Ubuntu user friendly so that comes as a no cost bonus.
The reason for bringing up Peppermint in this thread is that Trisquel cannot offer a 32-bit distro any longer. It's awesome that Trisquel has such cool tools for deblobb-ifying 64-bit Ubuntu, but nothing you've mentioned here helps with the 32-bit problem.
I assume from everything you've said on this subject that 32-bit Trisquel is a closed discussion, and that we will have to provide some alternative of our own making for our 32-bit machines.
If people stopped conflating the 32-bit thing and the Ubuntu based thing, the discussion would be much clearer. Especially people who are not even Trisquel users but keep flooding this forum with off-topic nonsensical posts. The PeppermintOS devs make their decisions according to their goals and resources, and the Trisquel devs make their decisions according to their goals resources. And users choose according to their own set of preferences. Thanks for your OP, by the way - I mean, the PeppermintOS part.
Last time the topic was brought up, the conclusion was that 32-bit Trisquel would keep happening if people are ready to take responsibility to make it happen. I did not hear that had changed, but I might not be listening to the proper channel. Of course, if nobody cared enough, it has been dropped by lack of volunteers. Lacking volunteers have only themselves to blame.
https://trisquel.info/en/forum/trisquel-32-bit-system#comment-165029
I do believe 32-bit makes more sense with "minimalist" systems, everything else seems to grow geometrically. antiX is a good example, there are others, and I am sure most 32-bit hardware users can find a decent solution among those. There will be libre 32-bit kernels, and where there are libre kernels, there is hope.
"Last time the topic was brought up, the conclusion was that 32-bit Trisquel would keep happening if people are ready to take responsibility to make it happen. I did not hear that had changed, but I might not be listening to the proper channel. Of course, if nobody cared enough, it has been dropped by lack of volunteers."
The situation has not changed. What's needed is the people power to pull it off; nothing more. If people want to see it happen please step forward.
Not sure if it's even possible anymore. I just looked on Distrowatch for "Ubuntu" based distros with an "i686" architecture version, and got a list of only 4 - Mint, FerenOS, Voyager Live, and something called "PrimTux". When I go to their download pages, Mint and FerenOS have recently stopped producing 32-bit versions, and Voyager and PrimTux are only offering Debian-based 32-bit versions. I don't see anyone actually producing a current Ubuntu-based 32-bit version. If I'm missing something, feel free to correct me.
I'm thinking Trisquel is probably not going to be the only community with enough volunteer man hours to squeeze out a 32-bit Ubuntu-based distro.
So I guess I answered my own question, with a solid "no, it's not happening". Which means that alternatives are the only possibility. Right now, Parabola and Hyperbola are still offering 32-bit versions, so still some legitimate and approved alternatives there.
"Not sure if it's even possible anymore."
From a technical perspective yes it is. Linux, GCC, etc. still completely support this architecture.
The problem is that Trisquel would have to build everything from source. While this is not necessarily technically difficult (most packages are inherited from Debian and should build without any issues), it does require a lot of resources that Trisquel doesn't have. I think the even bigger problem with Ubuntu is that they are increasingly focusing on Snap, and this might make the move to Debian inevitable.
Besides Parabola and Hyperbola, GuixSD is another option.
Hmm...
okay, I guess I misunderstood then... I had thought Debian would have given better security, although... it might not be true, because the only problems Ubuntu has is due to the crap they add, like snap packaging and other stuff like that.
But Trisquel does remove that anyways, so it might not matter.
Well, nvm then...
Edit:
Just to be clear, for those who don't know who I was replying to...
Jxself
I hadn't realized how much harder it was to make Debian look colorful like Ubuntu.
Anywho, peace...
I would like to know what exactly makes Ubuntu easier to use than Debian, in particular if you're using MATE (like Trisquel) rather than the default GNOME. I don't think Debian is that hard to use but maybe I'm out of touch.
I would say the nicest installer, and the software updater.
I am a translator!
I did not see a huge different with Debian Mate but still some things:
- I had to configure sudoers manually, user configured at installation was not allowed sudo
- choosing Mate in the installer did not actually install everything of Mate, was missing control center for instance
- perhaps not essential but if I don't accept to store the password of SSH keys in the key ring, I need to enter it every time I use an SSH key. In Trisquel, by some way I don't have to.
- profile is not sourced at login in Debian, in Trisquel it is. As a consequence, if you install Guix, the environment is not set by default (unlike in Trisquel).
- when I install things from Guix, there is an icon automatically in Trisquel, not in Debian
- I have no clue why but with Debian 11, Gajim from Debian or Guix displays shield icons for OMEMO in which it is impossible to distinguish "verified", "trusted" and "untrusted" fingerprints. With Trisquel 10, no such problem.
I don't have Trisquel under my eyes right now but I think the GUI for updates/install is easier in Trisquel. Personally, I only use command line, so not sure.
I never tried Triskel or Debian with KDE and never tried Debian with LXDE, so I don't know about them. I suppose it is important to keep them.
EDIT: I just remembered one thing: sudo was even not installed.
Every time I installed Debian, sudo was automatically configured. I don't think this depends on what DE you choose. If you don't enter a root password in the installer, it will configure sudo for you.
I don't really know about the other issues. But including the control center in MATE wouldn't be an issue for Trisquel, as Trisquel has its own metapackages (trisquel-mate, triskel, etc) anyway.
I am a translator!
If you don't enter a root password in the installer, it will configure sudo for you.
I didn't know that so I entered a password and then sudo was not installed.
It is actually very clear about that: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Debian_Graphical_Installer_Passwd_root-password_0.png
"If you leave this empty, the root account will be disabled and the system's initial user account will be given the power to become root using the 'sudo' command."
That said, I can see that a beginner probably wouldn't know about sudo. Fortunately, Debian live images (not the netinstall) now has the Calamares installer which is a user-friendly alternative.
I am a translator!
On my desktop, I used text mode as nothing else works. I don't recall the message in the screen capture that you showed. Perhaps it was there and I missed it. But as you said, this is not beginner friendly at all. Trisquel does not even ask and this is certainly the right thing to do. Any user who wants a root password would rather know, or learn how to set it afterwards.
Another option on which I am not sure: the "Debian desktop environment". Is that something that adds extra things to the each of the other options, or an alternative to them? There is zero explanation on that.
The message about sudo is also in the text installer: https://sharedbits.net/wp-content/uploads/post_images/2019/2019-013-10_debian--net--install_root--password_801x601.png
This is the "Debian desktop" metapackage: https://packages.debian.org/bookworm/task-desktop
I think the Calamares installer is what you want. It is offered in the Debian live images: https://averagelinuxuser.com/debian-10-calamares/
I am a member!
Raspberry Pi has a 32bit for desktop/laptop pc, I think it is based on Debian.
Raspberry Pi Desktop: Compatible with:
PC and Mac
Debian Buster with Raspberry Pi Desktop
Release date: January 11th 2021
System: 32-bit
Kernel version: 4.19
Debian version: 10 (buster)
Size: 2,948MB
I'm just saying, an FSF version of Debian should be called Stallian, even the motto "run free" works better with that pun.
There is a Free distro based on devuan
You are right!!!! Wow, trying it now.
Edit: Looks really good. The new iso's have been uploaded in the last 2 weeks, it tracks to the latest versions of the Devuan packages, and uses Linux-libre kernel and icecat browser. Here's my first screenshot from a 32-bit install this morning.
I'll do a separate thread to write up my experiences and give a how-to on installing it.
Looks like we have a 32-bit Free software contender! (and some serious 64-bit competition)
I am a member!
This looks very promising. Never heard of it. Going to download the image and test it on an old laptop. Thanks for the link damidu.
I downloaded the big full desktop ISO, which was a bit over 3gb. I'm focusing on 32-bit for the moment, because that's the pressing need, but I'm sure the 64-bit version is great also.
I am a member!
Trisquel is by far the easiest gnu/linux libre distro, in terms that it needs the least amount of user customization in order to work out of the box. In my experience it is even more simple and straightforward than ubuntu.
Debian is a great project and devuan/gnuinos seems really interesting project, but I feel that trisquel has it's own place in the world of free technology. Simple, effective and it just works.
Let one thousand flowers bloom as Mao never said (or did)...
The reason this is being discussed is that Trisquel no longer offers a 32-bit version, starting with Trisquel 10. GNUinOS does offer 32-bit, so it's worth exploring for that reason.
Debian is already very libre, so just use it instead of going through random derivatives
I am a member!
It is indeed a very libre distro. We are free enough to seek for more freedom if we want, aren't we?
No, we are now bound by a random post on our favorite forum to use Debian, and nothing else.
Please do as you are told, and be free.
>"Debian is already very libre, so just use it instead of going through random derivatives"
Using no computer at all is vastly more libre than Debian or anything else.
Eating bugs is vastly more organic than buying food from a grocery store or a market.
Living your entire life in a Himalayan cave is vastly more privacy respecting than typing words on an online forum.
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires