Trisquel XFCE
- Login o registrati per inviare commenti
Hello,
Is there any chance to see Trisquel XFCE [preferably LTS - long term support] versions? This would be ideal for all gnome-dislikers, corporate users, simple home users and alike.
It would be great to get truly gnu/linux libre distro with XFCE!
Best regards,
- marc
I am a translator!
Xfce4 is in the repository and you could install it over a base-install from the netinstall .iso image. It might contain Xubuntu art and icons though.
I'm more worried about Trisquel 4.0 to 5.0 users who are upgrading their
systems to the 5.5 release which is fully XFCE. Will the update manager
transition the Gnome 2 users to XFCE equivalents? Or will we be screwed?
Well, I followed your advice and used netinstall.
1. it took rediculous amount of time to configure, download packages, answer
all of these very detailed questions
2. installer didn't present me with option to install XFCE or any external
packages. I could only choose from console, desktop and minimal install.
Console ... well, Trisquel aims at average user I suppose. Building your own
distro from scratch doesn't seem to be the best thing to do for the newbies.
Minimal gave me LXDE and Desktop would leave me with Gnome. Neither of this
was what I wanted in a first place
3. after booting to LXDE I got menus misplaced [I got OpenBox menu instead of
LXDE's], PAM errors and XFCE setup would take even more time to download, not
mentioning rediculousness of doing it from LXDE desktop which I didn't want
in a first place
I am quite advanced, yet limited user. I tried to do my best with this, but
it didn't work. I don't think Trisqiel is all about doing it yourself
afterall.
Well, I hope someone would find some spare time to create third option for
many users of XFCE. For now I'll have to use Xubuntu, which uses non-libre
kernel, which - in turn - is not what I want.
Well, LIFE ...
Regards,
- marc
Well, I can perfectly understand lack of manpower to create another 'branch'.
It's ok. However - can you allow anonymous users to create it by themselves
and make it available to the public? howtos, etc? Maybe someone [maybe me]
would be able to do it.
Installing XFCE from within another DE is kinda not what the "default
desktop" attitude is all about. I guess you could delete LXDE branch and tell
LXDE users they can install LXDE from within Gnome anyway, so 'there's no big
deal'.
Besides - bear in mind that doing it all by yourself is - again - against
Trisquel goals and main user audience I guess. Or am I wrong? then everyone
can use netinstall.
XFCE is just a good alternative for Gnome and LXDE.
Gnome is kinda overloaded with stuff I didn't really use, has many
dependencies and just doesn't feel right.
LXDE - on the other hand - is kinda limited. It doesn't even provide users
with reasonable keybinding editor, doesn't allow to create shortcuts on
desktop, etc.
Anyway - don't get me wrong. I am very pleased Trisquel is there. Actually,
I've never seen such a great implementation of Gnome: it's incredibly fast
and light.
I do appreciate your hard work and I do accept the fact there will be no
official XFCE version of Trisquel.
Thank you for your kind answers,
Best regards,
- marc
I am a translator!
Another way of getting Xfce is to install Parabola (Arch based free software
distro) via net install and then install Xfce. It requires more effort to set
up, but it requires much less effort to maintain as the packages in the
repositories are usually updated regularly (unlike Trisquel, which only
provides security updates to packages and thus packages are always outdated
since each version of Trisquel is based on a version of Ubuntu which is a few
months old).
Of course one can do that for itself.
Do Gnome and LXDE-variant users need to do that though?
Unfortunately this request can not be met. If you read the
[https://trisquel.info/en/wiki/how-help how to help page], specifically the
section on community driven tasks, this isn't a request we can full-fill.
This falls under the "I want a $usage oriented version of the distro."
However as many people have pointed out you can still use xfce.
If you read further on that link I sent to you about "how to help" it also
says this:
If you want to spend some of your time doing such a task, please join the
development mailing list, and tell us about your project. We can give you
advice, and we will include your work in Trisquel when it is finished.
So yes if you do want to put in the work to do it you should join the dev
mailing list and if you really can put in the work to make it happen it might
get included.
Of course one can do that for itself.
Do Gnome and LXDE-variant users need to do that though?
I am a translator!
I know it's a workaround, but my guess is, making more flavors of Trisquel is too difficult at the moment, there are not enough manhours for that. Maybe one of the developers will post here and make an official statement, but I really don't think there will be a pre-made Xfce Trisquel in the future.
I am a translator!
I know it's a workaround, but my guess is, making more flavors of Trisquel is
too difficult at the moment, there are not enough manhours for that. Maybe
one of the developers will post here and make an official statement, but I
really don't think there will be a pre-made Xfce Trisquel in the future.
Well, I followed your advice and used netinstall.
1. it took rediculous amount of time to configure, download packages, answer all of these very detailed questions
2. installer didn't present me with option to install XFCE or any external packages. I could only choose from console, desktop and minimal install. Console ... well, Trisquel aims at average user I suppose. Building your own distro from scratch doesn't seem to be the best thing to do for the newbies. Minimal gave me LXDE and Desktop would leave me with Gnome. Neither of this was what I wanted in a first place
3. after booting to LXDE I got menus misplaced [I got OpenBox menu instead of LXDE's], PAM errors and XFCE setup would take even more time to download, not mentioning rediculousness of doing it from LXDE desktop which I didn't want in a first place
I am quite advanced, yet limited user. I tried to do my best with this, but it didn't work. I don't think Trisqiel is all about doing it yourself afterall.
Well, I hope someone would find some spare time to create third option for many users of XFCE. For now I'll have to use Xubuntu, which uses non-libre kernel, which - in turn - is not what I want.
Well, LIFE ...
Regards,
- marc
You can also opt for a desktop version of Trisquel (very simple install) and then install xfce4 from the Synaptic package manager. Select XFCE from the login window and you are done. If you wish, you can then remove some components of the previous desktop.
marc,
it is important to understand the intended focus and limited resources of Trisquel itself. Personally I see no big benefit in using XFCE over lets say LXDE or Gnome in regard to ressources. If you like scripting abilities inside the file manager you still can stick to Nautilus or use Thunar under LXDE.
Also SpaceFM is a nice option to enhance your desktop experience (http://spacefm.sourceforge.net/).
If you dislike using Xubuntu because of non-free stuff I suggest you stick to vanilla Debian with disabled non-free and contrib repos. It will give you a cleanly working XFCE desktop with no unfree stuff installed.
HTH,
Holger
marc,
it is important to understand the intended focus and limited resources of
Trisquel itself. Personally I see no big benefit in using XFCE over lets say
LXDE or Gnome in regard to ressources. If you like scripting abilities inside
the file manager you still can stick to Nautilus or use Thunar under LXDE.
Also SpaceFM is a nice option to enhance your desktop experience
(http://spacefm.sourceforge.net/).
If you dislike using Xubuntu because of non-free stuff I suggest you stick to
vanilla Debian with disabled non-free and contrib repos. It will give you a
cleanly working XFCE desktop with no unfree stuff installed.
HTH,
Holger
You can also opt for a desktop version of Trisquel (very simple install) and
then install xfce4 from the Synaptic package manager. Select it from the
login window and you are done. If you wish, you can then remove some
components of the previous desktop.
Unfortunately this request can not be met. If you read the how to help page, specifically the section on community driven tasks, this isn't a request we can full-fill.
This falls under the "I want a $usage oriented version of the distro." However as many people have pointed out you can still use xfce.
I'm more worried about Trisquel 4.0 to 5.0 users who are upgrading their systems to the 5.5 release which is fully XFCE. Will the update manager transition the Gnome 2 users to XFCE equivalents? Or will we be screwed?
I am a translator!
I believe it has been stated many times already, that 5.5 will use Gnome3 with it's fallback mode active by default.
It has been said many times but quidam has changed his mind. He was writing, in January:
We are still to settle on a new default desktop, but it is very
unlikely that it will be Unity. Mint's desktop is not an option as it
is in any case based on GNOME3, which we will not use at least until it
can be rendered fully -no silly fallbacks- without 3D acceleration.
Those earlier comments regarding Gnome 3 Fallback are because quidam was not aware of how to modify the fallback panel. On 29 January, in IRC, we explained to him how this can be done. He has since stated there that because the panel can actually be changed, Gnome 3 Fallback is a viable alternative. Since then he has been experimenting with Gnome 3 Fallback using, amongst other things, grvrulz's theme.
The last I heard (2 weeks ago) was that he was not sure about accessibility, specifically with GTK3 Orca and GTK2 applications. At the moment that seems to be the only possible issue with Gnome 3 Fallback. If accessibility turns out to not be an issue, then Gnome 3 Fallback will most likely be the DE.
I am a member!
Hi,
I'm using gnome 3 fallback on Ubuntu 11.10, and accessibility with Orca.
I think, with the latest orca, at-spi core and components, libreoffice
3.5, applications based on Mozilla Gecko 9 or 10, and the panel applets
found in ppa:jconti/gnome3, accessibility is as good as the
best-possible gnome 2.32 has to offer. That is, if someone can make the
latest lightdm or gdm as accessible as the previous. In Ubuntu 11.10,
lightdm is not accessible. Since I am the only user on this machine,
this matters little, but, maybe it's fixed in 12.04?
Cheers,
Dave Hunt
On 02/17/2012 10:45 AM, name at domain wrote:
> Those earlier comments regarding Gnome 3 Fallback are because quidam was
> not aware of how to modify the fallback panel. On 29 January, in IRC, we
> explained to him how this can be done. He has since stated there that
> because the panel can actually be changed, Gnome 3 Fallback is a viable
> alternative. Since then he has been experimenting with Gnome 3 Fallback
> using, amongst other things, grvrulz's theme.
>
> The last I heard (2 weeks ago) was that he was not sure about
> accessibility, specifically with GTK3 Orca and GTK2 applications. At the
> moment that seems to be the only possible issue with Gnome 3 Fallback.
> If accessibility turns out to not be an issue, then Gnome 3 Fallback
> will most likely be the DE.
Those earlier comments regarding Gnome 3 Fallback are because quidam was not
aware of how to modify the fallback panel. On 29 January, in IRC, we
explained to him how this can be done. He has since stated there that because
the panel can actually be changed, Gnome 3 Fallback is a viable alternative.
Since then he has been experimenting with Gnome 3 Fallback using, amongst
other things, grvrulz's theme.
The last I heard (2 weeks ago) was that he was not sure about accessibility,
specifically with GTK3 Orca and GTK2 applications. At the moment that seems
to be the only possible issue with Gnome 3 Fallback. If accessibility turns
out to not be an issue, then Gnome 3 Fallback will most likely be the DE.
It has been said many times but quidam has changed his mind. He was writing,
in January:
We are still to settle on a new default desktop, but it is very
unlikely that it will be Unity. Mint's desktop is not an option as it
is in any case based on GNOME3, which we will not use at least until it
can be rendered fully -no silly fallbacks- without 3D acceleration.
Hi
I tried to search for more information on this and came up with some of
the reasons for switching(which I support) but is there somewhere I can
find more information on the official decision?
XFCE looks fine to me but the apps are quite different.
Thanks
On 12-02-17 02:29 AM, name at domain wrote:
> I'm more worried about Trisquel 4.0 to 5.0 users who are upgrading
> their systems to the 5.5 release which is fully XFCE. Will the update
> manager transition the Gnome 2 users to XFCE equivalents? Or will we
> be screwed?
>
I am a translator!
I believe it has been stated many times already, that 5.5 will use Gnome3
with it's fallback mode active by default.
I am a translator!
Another way of getting Xfce is to install Parabola (Arch based free software distro) via net install and then install Xfce. It requires more effort to set up, but it requires much less effort to maintain as the packages in the repositories are usually updated regularly (unlike Trisquel, which mostly provides security updates to packages and thus packages are usually outdated since each version of Trisquel is based on a version of Ubuntu which is a few months old).
Well, I can perfectly understand lack of manpower to create another 'branch'. It's ok. However - can you allow anonymous users to create it by themselves and make it available to the public? howtos, etc? Maybe someone [maybe me] would be able to do it.
Installing XFCE from within another DE is kinda not what the "default desktop" attitude is all about. I guess you could delete LXDE branch and tell LXDE users they can install LXDE from within Gnome anyway, so 'there's no big deal'.
Besides - bear in mind that doing it all by yourself is - again - against Trisquel goals and main user audience I guess. Or am I wrong? then everyone can use netinstall.
XFCE is just a good alternative for Gnome and LXDE.
Gnome is kinda overloaded with stuff I didn't really use, has many dependencies and just doesn't feel right.
LXDE - on the other hand - is kinda limited. It doesn't even provide users with reasonable keybinding editor, doesn't allow to create shortcuts on desktop, etc.
Anyway - don't get me wrong. I am very pleased Trisquel is there. Actually, I've never seen such a great implementation of Gnome: it's incredibly fast and light.
I do appreciate your hard work and I do accept the fact there will be no official XFCE version of Trisquel.
Thank you for your kind answers,
Best regards,
- marc
If you read further on that link I sent to you about "how to help" it also says this:
If you want to spend some of your time doing such a task, please join the development mailing list, and tell us about your project. We can give you advice, and we will include your work in Trisquel when it is finished.
So yes if you do want to put in the work to do it you should join the dev mailing list and if you really can put in the work to make it happen it might get included.
I love Xfce and would be glad to contribute my abilities in customizing it - I've got Xfce running and looking exactly like Trisquel's GNOME2's layout, in fact.
- Login o registrati per inviare commenti