Plus, Debian Stable packages are more outdated than the 12.04.2 LTS and it
is debatable which one is more stable.
I'd be very surprised if Debian stable wasn't stabler. Ubuntu LTS is based on
Debian testing to get newer packages which leads to less time to squish bugs.
On Trisquel I used a default web browser and I don't install any
addon's/extensions, on other distros I used a Firefox and I test a Chrome
I agree that basing on LTS is the logical choice for now, but imo Trisquel
should still look at the potential for switching to Debian in the future -
especially if Ubuntu continues to insist on re-inventing the wheel and using
non-standard system components, e.g. Upstart. It's completely
When the next LTS of Ubuntu is released in a year, then that release will
have newer packages than Wheezy.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, the 12.04 release can be on par with
Wheezy in freshness if you use PPAs for software that you use on a daily
basis.
Your talking about using Debian stable with backports right?
I'm not 100% sure that is actually the case. In general I think your right
although the core applications in Ubuntu are based on testing rather than
stable so there should be more less significant packages that are newer. You
That seems like a good idea although my gut says it would introduce a lot of
bugs. I'd love for somebody to do some serious investigating on this
component. It does seem to me that upstart was either a mistake or done too
soon.
Another point in favor of Debian is politics. If we base on Ubuntu we are
relying on Canonical, meaning we are on the corporation's back. Basing on
Debian there is no corporation control behind upstream.
I know what the problem is - the file apt-offline is just a local disk as
Windows calls it. Renaming it to a Python file doesn't work either.
I do not know what is a local disk but I doubt there would be such an
obvious problem in the installation procedure. Again, the bug usually is
between the keyboard and the chair.
Have you rewritten your command with the whole path to apt-offline (as I
suggested)? For instance, if it in the
A version of the Ubuntu Software center for Trisquel would definitely be a
nice addition. I'm not sure this is as important though as having newer set
of base applications and better integration of those packages. I think it is
still best to continue on the Ubuntu path for the target user
I don't know if they changed this, but the last time I used Python on
Windows, the Python installation folder wasn't added to PATH by default, so
you needed to explicitly give the full path name Python is installed in (e.g.
C:\Python27\python.exe for Python 2.7 by default, though the
Can I mine bitcoins with with my Mac? is the hardware is powerful enough? I
am eager to enter this field.
I don't think a GPU is good enough now. I believe mining now done on
FFGPA's.
On 10/03/13 21:18, bitcoinsmas...@gmail.com wrote:
Can I mine bitcoins with with my Mac? is the hardware is powerful
enough? I am eager to enter this field.
I have not used Trisquel in a long time (Fedora user now), but I still follow
these developments regularly. They interest me. I have followed this entire
thread, and I must repeat one suggestion made earlier, in spades:
If Trisquel is going the LTS-only route w/backports (which appears
I agree with most of your points, but not on using MATE. MATE is built using
gtk2 and is incompatible with upstream gnome. And as gtk3 progressess, it'll
keep getting older and older. One viable solution is to use Consort, which is
built off of gnome 3.6 fallback, and is compatible with
Yes, I forgot about Consort. That might be the way forward.
But if someday all major 3D hardware is supported with freedom, then I would
support a switch to GNOME 3. That DE runs about as light as XFCE, and it's
too modern and beautiful to pass up. Traditional desktop forks and reversions
16 matches
Mail list logo
