PSPunch(e)k dio: >> What do you think might be the better approach, to use ubuntu normal, or >> ubuntustudio? Roman told me that for a while there's no big difference, >> because the -rt kernel comes with ubuntu. Is ubuntustudio more than a >> bundle of software with nice backgrounds? (Note: I'll use the same setup >> on both computers, so the system should work on 64 and 32b). > > As far as I know, "Studio" is just plain Ubuntu that comes with a set of > software relevant to audio & video. > As a matter of fact, installing the "studio (or a name of that sort)" > meta package on plain Ubuntu is the same as starting out with a "studio" > installation CD/DVD. > > Probably it is just the matter of preference in images used for the > startup screen and the default wall paper.
i think there is something else than just the kernel and packages. some tweaks on the configuration that the plain Ubuntu does not have, stuff like memory use, priorities and groups + permissions. But i think all can be done by hand. enrike _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
