Hello,
I'm a new trisquel user (installed it some months ago) and I use both
trisquel and trisquel-mini (6.0.1) on different computers.
I noticed that my install of trisquel-mini on a relatively good computer
(Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU 2.40GHz, 512 Mo of ram, Nvidia Ge force 2 MX200),
was quite slow. So I tried to search on the web for informations about
trisquel-mini and I found this comment on a trisquel test :
http://desktoplinuxreviews.com/trisquel-reviews/trisquel-6-0-lts/
"My installation of Trisquel Mini 6.0 to an EeePC 701 lasted less than 24
hours.
Why?
lxdm-binary was hammering the cpu & hogging resources, so nothing else could
run properly, yet it could not be removed & replaced because of broken
dependencies with the alernatives.
cpufreqd would run only at 100%, regardless of configuration.
The desktop was automatically covered with folders, regardless of
configuration.
Too many useful & genuinely FLOSS applications are not available in the
Trisquel repository: just how ‘free’ does FLOSS have to be before the
Trisquel dictator accepts it?
Trisquel Mini is NOT light, it still uses a PAE kernel.
AFAIC, it’s a bug-ridden pile of garbage.
Failed: it doesn’t ‘just work'; & I take a ruthless approach to operating
systems.
I’ll stick with MadBox 12.04, which is perhaps the ONLY genuinely light
Ubuntu-based derivative available, & use the free repository."
I'm quite a noob in linux, so I decided to post here to see if someone could
explain me that commentary.
Isn't there any way to obtain good performances with trisquel-mini as this
guy seems to say ?
