On 11/7/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 写于 2006-11-07 01:09:04: > > Unfortunatley we have a bad regression since dapper. The liveCD will > > not function properly > > with 128M of RAM and no swap. This I only noticed in qemu and > > wrongly assumed (hoped) it's > > specific to it, but we get bugreports confirming it on real machines. > > This sadly makes xubuntu lose one of its selling points :( I have no > > idea what causes the extra memory > > use, it may be system-tools-backend which use perl, but I don't knowfor > sure. > > > > Jani-- > > To be honest, I don't think that 'low memory consumption' could be a > selling point of xubuntu in the long run. > > The "really low memory consumption" Linux is Damn-Small Linux (a.k.a. DSL), > which requires 64M memory, the live cd is less than 200M and it uses debian > package system. if you tried it you'll be amazed how complete it is. I have > to admit that future Linux for computers with 128M should be DSL.
dsl is not based on ubuntu-base + ubuntu-standard + ubuntu-minimal, it's even very difficult to maintain as pacakges cames from sid, etch and there are custom ones. If you install a new package that calls an upgrade of other pacakges , then dsl is just gone. I guess the only smart idea is to use a slimmed down xserver. > The "Xfce-based ubuntu", in my opinion is the most beautiful ubuntu, it has > the selling point of "elegant design" and "elegant feel". As an OS should > be feature rich, I would not choose an elegant OS if it lacks certain > functionality. > > So, please, add the useful functionalities to Xubuntu and be glad with it. > > [] > Some story just like this: suppose two guys Tom and Mike have two different > company, both are making cars that sells $1000. > Tom's thinking how to makes cars that sells $800 or even less. > However, Mike's thinking he should make cars that sell $2000+. > Several years later, Mike has a big company and be a sucessful man, while > Tom has a poor end... > [] > > Lessons for that: if Xubuntu always tries to be a "low-memory-consumption" > alternative to ubuntu, it will always be an alternative, always be the > second choice. But why not replace the "gnome-based" ubuntu at all? why > not make xubuntu the default choice for some users? It is much more > important to make xubuntu "beautiful ui and elegant design" than to keep it > small. synaptic or app-install can help here to add packages. If i remeber well xubuntu goal is to be installable even on old machine, that doesn't prevent to install on newer ones ... > Of course, that's just my 2 cents. > -- > Sincerely, Pan, Shi Zhu. ext: 2606 > -- > xubuntu-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel > -- ---- http://dsslive.org ---- -- xubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel
