Is work being started on a "feisty Mepis" ? ;)

I believe Warren said on his last podcast that he was starting to work on the next release.

Wayne

We need to hear more from Warren -- I'm sure he is working on another release, but I think he previously said he wanted to use a long-term support (LTS) version of Ubuntu as the base. Dapper has long-term support. Ubuntu Feisty (7.04) does not, and the next version, planned for October release, will not have long-term support, either. That means the next version of Ubuntu that has long-term support will be released some time in 2008.

Mike

My recollection of the podcast was that Warren was looking strongly at Feisty as a base for a new version. It was part of the "there's only one good kernel a year" discission, and that the Feisty kernel might just be that one.

BICBW

Dapper has obsolete software.

Edgy has obsolete software.

Feisty has software that's *still* behind if you have the latest and great digital camera or some other hardware, but it's better than the older repositories.

SimplyMEPIS needs to going Feisty. Then, as soon as the first alphas and betas of the next Ubuntu releases come out, start working on test releases to try and keep up with it (as best as resources permit).

Jim C.

Just remember that Warren will opt for stable. Stability is better than bleeding edge

I'd consider Feisty to be more stable than Dapper, and it's got newer software to support newer hardware.

It's not like you're trying to mirror Debian testing or Experimental (even though they're not current, either). Feisty is still behind. But, it's stable as "stable" goes.

Jim C.

ALL distributions have "obsolete software". There is a constant stream of new hardware, boxes, and goodies that need new drivers, tools, and applications. The only time that it is possible to get the drivers/tools at the same time as the new hardware comes out is if there is prior collaboration in the design of the software and hardware. Unfortunately, there's only one company that can afford to do that, and force manufacturers to follow suit: Microsoft. All Linux and *BSD developers must wait until the hardware is on the market. I won't go into issues of trademark, patent, and copyright (they are different).

When eadwine mentions "stable" it means that most of the obvious, irritating, bad bugs have been worked out. When you state, "Feisty... [has] got newer software to support newer hardware", that is NOT the definition of "stable". That is the definition of "current". The two are definitely not synonymous. I think the best way for a distribution like Mepis to serve the biggest population is to tread a little cautiously. If it means not being able to support the newest hardware NOW, well that's a price that has to be paid.

Jon

No computer is magic, no operating system is magic, no website is magic. They all require human interaction, thought, and responsibility to work.

We'll just have to disagree.

From my perspective, newer releases of software like Ubuntu tend to be more stable with more hardware than the versions they replaced. I play with newer Ubuntu versions as they come out. I just don't really like it a lot (menu layouts, cosmetics, etc.).

SimplyMEPIS is now two production releases behind Ubuntu (since we now have 6.10 and 7.04 out).

Heck, for the past few days, I've been running on Fedora 7 Test 4, and it even updated me to the newer kernel since I installed it (now running 2.6.21-1 after updating packages using the built in package updater)

It's been stable as a rock so far (and fast I might add -- much faster than I expected it to be, as it seems to balance load quite well with SMP, even though my CPU is only an Intel Prescott with HT versus a true dual core model).

Sure, it's got it's downsides (I really don't like the cluttered menus, software choices, yum package management, NTFS partitions not mounted by default, etc.). But, I wanted to give it a try since it's got newer software for things like Image Editing, and it's been perfectly stable (at least on my hardware), and it's not even a production release yet.

So, personally, I'd like to see MEPIS trying to run development against newer Ubuntu alphas and betas, trying to go final about the same time (or shortly thereafter), if Ubuntu is going to be used as a base.

Sure, Warren has been pretty good about trying to update some software that has not been updated in the Ubuntu Dapper pools.

But, wouldn't it be a lot easier just to put that effort in trying to use a newer release as the base (since the Ubuntu package maintainers are already including newer software in newer releases)? That way, instead of select software being updated as time permits, you'd have a lot of newer software to keep more users happy.

Jim C.

It's always a trade off.

Personally I think a 6 month release cycle is plain nuts. What Ubuntu should have done with Dapper is allow for rolling upgrades. Instead, their Long Term Support label is a lie. If they had a model that allows for incremental upgrades using the same base, nobody would be complaining. Heck, Warren is still using the 2.6.15 kernel and it supports more hardware than Feisty's 2.6.20. And even a kernel upgrade can be done from the same foundation.

Imagine this:

Dell is going to be selling PCs and laptops with Feist pre-installed. Suppose that one year from now, somebody buys a Feisty Dell. Then 6 months later they find out upgrades are no longer available, and they find out they can dist-upgrade to the Gruesome Gorilla. There's a 50% chance that that goes gloriously wrong....

If Ubuntu were wise, they would start to seriously think about extended support and upgradeability for Feisty, if only to prevent the Dell deal from going sour over the honeymoon.

Newbie or not Newbie, there's always a question

Yes... It's going to be interesting to watch it play out. Want a new printer? Upgrade your distro to a newer version. Want a new digital camera, upgrade your distro, etc.

Ubuntu's history of backporting newer versions of software and drivers leaves a lot to be desired from my perspective.

But, I'm noticing the same thing with other distros. Heck, look at Etch. A lot of the software in it is pretty obsolete (and it just recently went to stable status).

I don't know what the solution is. But, there needs to be a better way to approach it.

I'm sure Warren is doing what he can with the resources available, and he has tried to update some packages that Ubuntu didn't backport to the Dapper pools. But, a lot of software has not been updated to current versions.

It's easier for a Windows user to install some of the newer Open Source software versions compared to trying to do it in most Linux distros. Something needs to change.

I've been downloading some of the distros that I haven't messed around with in the past (Fedora, Mandrake and more) to try and see if they may be a bit better with backports compared to Ubuntu and Debian based distros. But, I'm not holding my breath. Right this minute, I'm running under Fedora 7 Test 4. It seems to be more current than most. But, I don't know much about their history of backporting software when a new version comes out.

Jim C.

Sidux is a relatively new distro. I like it so far. I don't recommend it for a newbie because they don't use the gui to upgrade (they dist-upgrade sid in init 3)
There is an excellent script (h2 script) which will handle all the upgrading -- including kernel upgrades.

Here's a story about sidux. http://sidux.com/PNphpBB2-viewtopic-t-2508.html

You do need to read the sidux forums in order to use sidux. There are very experienced helpful people who are on the forums all the time.

You can also try Sabayon but I don't recommend trying to upgrade your whole system except by going to the next version of the DVD or the mini-CD (you can save what you want easily). You can upgrade individual packages with no problems.

Kanotix is dormant now -- all the developers except Kano are enthusiastically working on Sidux. Kano occasionally compiles kernels and you can use his kernels on most Debian distros -- they may not work with Ubuntu or Mepis. He also says you can safely dist-upgrade Debian Etch or the previous versions of Kanotix from testing. He no longer supports dist-upgrade using unstable.

Kororaa is also dormant now. I have not tried out of the box Gentoo.

Mike

I've tried it. The way it was configured reminded me a little of Kanotix (horrible default fonts).

I guess that's because some of the same developers are involved and they're still working on it.

I don't want to spend a lot of time trying to make a desktop look nice. I'd rather use a distro that's already nice looking with good font selections, menu layout, etc.

Interestingly, I was trying out the latest RC for DreamLinux yesterday and noticed it was using a Kanotix kernel.

But, the software in Debian Etch (which is what DreamLinux is based on) is not current enough for me, and I really don't want to go to a distro using Sid (Kanotix, Sidux, etc.). I am aware of H2's scripts. But, I have had very little luck doing upgrades without breaking something using distros based on Sid (even if I'm only upgrading packages versus a dist-upgrade). Sid is called unstable for a reason from my perspective, based on my experience using it.

I'll give the next release of Sidux a look. But, I have not been impressed with the "look and feel" of the efforts so far. I want a polished desktop *and* up to date software, *and* stability.

Jim C.

On upgrading software:
http://pag.csail.mit.edu/~adonovan/dilbert/show.php?day=11&month=6&year=2002

--
Check out MEPIS Wiki: www.mepis.org/docs

Jim C.

What I have snipped shows your contradictionary statement. You want Sid apps, but don't want a Sid-based disto ie Sidux, the only one out there as far as I know.
So, how are you going to achieve that? I am sure you are well aware, that sid is a constantly moving target (well, actually that is not quite true, as the Etch freeze recently led to a similar 'freeze' in sid) and sid snapshots like Ubuntu/Mepis (in the past and maybe the future?) soon get very dated.
IMO the only project that comes close to what you want is the sidux project as it is deliberately set up to try and 'tame' sid, with all the support mechanism that does not exist in a straight debian-sid install, or try a debian etch net-install, change the apt-sources to unstable and off you go, but without any official support.
I also don't like the sidux/kanotix font set up on my box, but I managed to implant my Mepis 3.4.3 font settings onto sidux and I'm happy.

If you have the time and inclination for the good of free software and the spirit of linux, try installing Mepis 3.4.3, set it up as you like, the dist-upgrade through the debian sid repos. You may get the box you are looking for.
I have.

Cheers,

anticapitalista

Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.

Actually, some of the software I'd want to have is obsolete in Sid. Debian is lagging way behind some of the other distros around for current software for some of the graphics based stuff.

I don't use the word obsolete lightly. If you've purchased a newer digital camera that shoots in raw and you want to view and process those photos in some of the software around like digiKam, forget it using Etch or Sid (unless the package lists showing the 0.8.x versions for software like digiKam in the Sid repos are not correct on debian.org).

The digiKam 0.8.x version doesn't even support 16 bit edits for that matter and the integrated dcraw.c code is way behind the current version (according to the package lists at debian.org, Sid is at 8.39 and the current dcraw.c release is already up to 8.72). That's more than 30 releases behind.

You can find the versions here (I'm assuming it's actually correct). If not, please correct that assumption.

http://packages.debian.org/testing/graphics/

You have to update software like dcraw.c often if you want support for raw files from newer cameras. David Coffin (the author of dcraw.c that many raw converters base their code on) works hard to keep this code current so that it supports newer camera models as they become available.

But, Linux package maintainers don't appear to care about keeping the versions of this kind of software integrated into their distros current, and new Linux users are not going to want to figure out how to compile software from source and work out any dependency issues.

Yea -- I know -- stability. But, what good is stability if the software is so out of date that you need a discontinued camera model to get it to work? Package maintainers need to keep it reasonably current.

I know that Etch is obsolete (as I was just running DreamLinux and checked the versions), and debian.org shows an older version in Sid, too.

Heck, the versions of some of this software in SimplyMEPIS 6.5 is newer (Warren tried to update some of it). But, it's missing some critical pieces (newest kipi plugins don't work right, dcraw.c code integrated into digikam is not current and more).

Ditto for some of the software in Ubuntu Feisty (some of it's software is newer than Sid, too, and it's a production release).

To get reasonably current versions of some of this type of software in Debian, you have to go with Experimental (and some of it is out of date, too). Now, I have used that technique in the past with Kanotix (added the experimental repos and got some of it to install). So, that's an option -- but, only if you're really lucky and have the expertise to sort out any problems you run into (and I don't). lol

I tended to break it more often than not and end up reinstalling the distro from scratch to get it sorted out. Now, if I were more experienced, I could probably figure out the issues (what broke and why). I don't want to be a Linux guru - just have reasonably current software.

I'd like to use a distro that I'm comfortable recommending to Windows users, too. I'm still looking for one that has current software and is easy to install and use.

I dunno. That's why I've been trying a lot of new distros lately. But,a number of them (Fedora 7, Ubuntu and others) appear to have newer versions of some of this stuff compared to Debian Sid.

Heck, the reason I'm running SimplyMEPIS 6.0-4 Beta 4 on my wife's laptop is because I broke her 3.4.3 install when I tried to update packages (and I wasn't even trying a dist-upgrade, I just wanted newer versions of some of the stuff already in the repos).

Now, I have not tried a dist-upgrade from 3.4.3 before to see if that actually works (and I understand that H2's scripts might be a way to give that a go).

But, given the state of the Debian repositories (something always seems to be out of whack with them), I'm not so sure I'd want to waste my time trying it, because if it breaks, I'm not going to know how to fix it without a reinstall.

Sid doesn't appear to have current software anyway

Look... I'm a moderator on a digital camera forum and I see posts from brand new DSLR owners all the time wanting software to process raw files from their new toys. I'd love to be able to say "install this Linux distro because it's got a neat program called digiKam that let's you browse albums of raw photos, do minor editing tasks and more".

Instead, I'm hesitant to recommend any Linux distro, because of the difficulty in getting reasonably current releases of software to perform those types of tasks.

I sometimes suggest products like UFRaw, too. But, it's *much* easier for a Windows user to get the latest version than it is to try and find a Linux distro that has it.

You have to have new software to process raw files from new cameras. You can't take software designed to process a raw file from a Nikon D70, Canon EOS-20D, etc., and expect it to work on newer models (Nikon D40x, Canon EOS-30D, etc.). The raw files change with each new camera model, and more and more new DSLR owners are shooting in raw now for optimum flexibility and image quality.

Software related to digital imaging needs to be updated *often*. That's not happening with Linux distros I've used in the past, which is probably one reason that Photoshop is the most requested application for Linux. At least Adobe is pretty good about updates to it's camera raw plugins as new camera models are introduced.

Are there commercial alternatives for Linux? Sure. But, the free software available for Linux should be a reason for Windows users to want to switch, not a reason to avoid Linux (because the versions in most distros are too far out of date to work with raw files from current camera models and you'd need to figure out how to compile this stuff yourself and work out dependency issues to use it).

I don't know what the solution is. I just know that digital imaging applications need to be at a *much* higher priority for getting new versions (and the latest beta versions for that matter) backported into repos.

I've mentioned this issue from time to time in the forums here (and also in notes to Warren). Warren did update some packages (but, some of the critical pieces are still not up to date).

It's a weak area and Linux should be showcasing the newest versions of image editors, raw converters and more to attract new users, not putting newer versions of these types of tools on the "back burner" for backports.

According to the latest surveys by IDC, over 18 million digital cameras shipped in 2006 (with more expected to ship in 2007).

It's hot market and it's a great opportunity to get new users trying Linux, if the package maintainers could figure out a way to keep the software current, and this needs to be an ongoing process -- not just trying to get a newer version installed in a newer distro release and leaving it that way until the next major distro release.

Microsoft is working very hard to integrate more functionality into Windows in this area, because they're smart enough to realize that it's a reason for users to continue using their operating system. Better support for raw image file browsing, better integration with color management and more.

Linux package maintainers need to take digital imaging seriously.

I am going to throw the fox in the henhouse here:

ANY package is out of date, ANY distro is too, no matter how bleeding edge you get the CD or DVD.

If you really want bleeding edge, then get the cvs, the development files of any which package, however, don't complain if stuff breaks.

Mepis is about stability, once the software version you like is considered stable by Warren I am sure it will be included on the CD.

You want more than Mepis can give you at the moment, but Mepis is sticking to stability because many new users cannot handle unstable software and then just give up on the entire Mepis/Linux deal.

It's an easy conclusion to draw: the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

I don't think the biggest issue is stability.

I think it's mostly resources to handle the dependency issues.

Sure, even the "latest and greatest" production versions (considered stable by their developers) of some of this software is not the latest they have available.

But, every effort should be made to at least have the current production versions (considered to be stable and production releases by their developers) of popular software installed in a new distro release. That's not happening with many distros.

I'm sure Warren does what he can. But, he's got limited resources, and Ubuntu package maintainers don't seem to place a high priority on backporting newer software to Dapper.

That's why I'm in favor of going with Feisty if MEPIS continues with an Ubuntu base (the software is more current for more packages), and go with newer versions as they come out (working closely with the alphas and betas before they go final).

As for the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few, I feel confident that Microsoft is counting on that.

That's probably one big reason many people avoid Linux, even when they've tried it. The software is not current enough in many distros to meet the needs of the many, and they don't want to learn how to compile it themselves when they can get current versions of software and drivers easily using Windows.

MS is counting on the needs of the many keeping them from using Linux as much).

From my perspective, the sooner Linux distros can find a development model that lets them get newer versions of software into distros faster, the more people that will use it, and the the more resources that will be available to help that process along.

I'm just pointing out what I believe to be some very weak areas based on my limited experience using Linux.

I don't have all of the answers. But, from the outside looking in, there has got to be a better way to approach it. Ubuntu's solution appears to be a new versions of Ubuntu being released at a relatively fast pace.

I don't really like that approach (I'd rather they figure out a way to backport more software and drivers so that users wouldn't need to upgrade their distro to get newer software). But, it's one way to do it, and MEPIS is now 2 production releases behind Ubuntu.

It's probably a matter of resources on Ubuntu's end, too (only so many resources and they made a call to put those resources on newer versions instead of backporting more software to existing versions).

That's just a guess (as I don't know how that development model works internally). But, there has got to be a better way to approach it from my perspective as an outsider to the development process.

I do: get one or two people interested in this issue who are willing to learn how to create deb files. Offer them as a backport.

Creating debs is not rocket science. If you put yourself to it, you can create a deb tomorrow, and surely you'll get some help from e.g. Adrian.

I think yours is the perfect showcase for how open source can work. You REALLY are concerned with an issue, and the tools are out there for you to solve it. So you could start digging in and solve a problem that is real for you.

Newbie or not Newbie, there's always a question

If the package doesn't depend of a library that's not installable in MEPIS, or on latest version of KDE, or latest version of X, or it doesn't need to be compiled with latest version of GCC then making a deb is trivial, otherwise is a little (or more) complicated.

--
Check out MEPIS Wiki: www.mepis.org/docs

This is the digikam version in Sid. (0.9.1)

http://packages.debian.org/unstable/graphics/digikam

anticapitalista

Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.

OK -- I was looking at the wrong page.

But, it depends on dcraw.c, and that code is more than 30 releases behind now (meaning that you can't view any raw files created from newer camera models using digiKam since it relies on dcraw for the demosaic algorithms for the raw conversion to a viewable image format).

I see that it has a urgency of "low" assigned.

http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/d/dcraw/dcraw_8.39-1/changelog

Jim C.

That's the wrong approach. We're already seeing way too much of that already (individuals realizing the importance of newer versions of some software and offering links to packages to install it, since the distro package maintainers don't).

Sure, I could try to figure out how to do it myself and add yet another link to packages that might work with a specific Linux distro and version. But, that doesn't help Linux as a whole from my perspective.

It needs to be done by the distro providers. Even better, there needs to be more cooperation between distros so that what amounts to the same work isn't being done by hundreds of people for different distros.

The fractured development model Linux seems to be using now is a gigantic waste of resources.

Sure, more choice is a good thing. But, when the lack of resource sharing is more extreme (as it seems to be right now), it does more harm than good from my perspective.

It looks like Warren has made some effort in the past to cooperate in ways that would help Linux. For example, Warren's participation in the DCC Alliance. I won't try to guess what happened there. Or, Warren moving towards an Ubuntu base for newer versions of SimplyMEPIS.

I think the main issue there (and I'm guessing) is that Warren assumed that "Long Term Support" meant just that, and that commonly used applications would be updated, without a user needing to upgrade their distro version to get newer software.

That's not working out so well from my perspective. I'm not blaming Warren. I'm sure he's making the best decisions that he can given what he knows at the time of those decisions.

In this particular case (digital imaging), the apparent ignorance being displayed towards applications related to digital imaging is absolutely amazing to me.

I can't comprehend why these applications are not taken more seriously, when polls show that an application like Photoshop is *the most requested* application for Linux.

There are millions of digital cameras being sold (with DSLR models as the fastest growing market segment, and many DSLR owners want to shoot in raw).

But, try to use most Linux distros with raw files from those cameras. Sorry, you can't view the images, add them to albums, etc. with the pretty darn good open source applications included (because the versions of the applications and/or related dependencies are too far behind to support newer cameras with the features that users demand).

It needs to be done at a more fundamental level, so that Linux distributions are a way to attract new users to Linux. Digital Imaging applications should be a showcase for Linux.

There are millions of new camera owners that may be swayed to try or switch to Linux, if only the software for digital imaging was kept more up to date in mainstream Linux distros.

I was beginning to wonder if the package maintainers are on Adobe or Microsoft's payroll. But, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt, and chalk it up to ignorance, despite the polls showing the importance of software related to digital imaging.

Perhaps I'm the ignorant one, since I really don't understand how the development process in mainstream Linux distros works.

But, the way I'm looking at it, if people with the skills to do it volunteer to maintain packages associated with these applications, then they should do just that -- maintain them. That means backporting newer versions.

If they don't plan on doing that, let it be known, so that replacements for them can be found. There are are already many individuals involved with Linux that have the needed skills, and I'm guessing that they'd be willing to volunteer.

I don't have the skills (although I should probably try to learn them). I consider myself to be a Linux newbie (despite using it for quite a while now).

I do try to help out in my own way. For example, more than one of the cameras you see supported in dcraw right now, were supported earlier because I sent Dave Coffin images from them before they hit the store shelves, so he could reverse engineer the file formats and add support for them.

I sometimes have access to cameras before they hit the store shelves, and if they're not already supported, I try to help out. Since so many image editing applications rely on Dave's code, I want to make sure that users have more choices for processing their images by helping in that way.

But, if Linux package maintainers don't actually use the newer code until the cameras have been on the market for a very long time, millions of potential Linux users are going to stick with Windows.

So, yea, I get a bit steamed over it from time to time. Perhaps I shouldn't. I have no ulterior motive other than wanting a solution that helps more users realize the benefits of free software.

For whatever reason (and I'm still trying to figure that one out myself), I want Linux to succeed, and I see the lack of priority being given to Digital Imaging as a *huge* holdup to the development model needed for success.

I also see the same types of issues with other software. It's a darn shame when a Windows user can easily click on a download link and install newer versions of Open Source software available for multiple platforms (Open Office and more).

Yet, they can't get these newer versions easily with most Linux distros (which should be showcasing newer versions of Open Source software) because the packages for them in mainstream repositories are not current.

Jim, I think you missed a point. When carlops pointed out that you are the sort of person who has a desire, need, and expertise in an area, he was meaning that you, yourself are the sort of person to help coordinate and lead improvements in this area.

You correctly pointed out that there are a tremendous number of Linux distributions out there. But the distro maintainers are kind of like small restaurants that have their own specialties. Many of them may server meatloaf, most may even serve hamburgers, but others will specialize in seafood, Italian, or Mexican. They "buy" they fare from the people who make the ingredients. The package maintainers and developers are the ones who choose to keep these things up to date.

You think that there should be more emphasis upon digital cameras and imaging software. Good for you. I happen to have a friend who's going nuts trying to get a frickin' modem working with his system because he does not have any type of broadband service. Here's a technology that is supposed to not have progressed very much, but new hardware is still coming out, and new drivers are still being produced, and they mess up on new Linux distros. Talk about technology that even the developers thing is "low priority"! Who uses modems anymore? Well, quite a few people actually. And I like to play with different operating systems, and work on learning more about different programming languages and such. For me "virtualization tools are the bomb!" So I'd love if there were more, better, cheaper (free?) virtualization tools than those that exist.

But I also know, you're probably not a programmer, or don't want to be. I'm not suggesting that you become one. I'm a professional programmer, but I certainly don't have the time to work on fixing applications that I did not write (that's to my own shame). But what I'd suggest is that you use your power as a moderator on some of the other sites, and contact the package developers if you haven't already. Let them know what you think the fixes need to be. Perhaps you can talk them into bringing things up-to-speed.

Unfortunately, much of the Linux world is always going to be "catch up" with released products. Until the hardware developers see the value added by Linux geeks. The Windows developers hare involved before release, and they are probably signed to secrecy so they could not possibly, legally tell anyone what they're working on anyway.

So, by all means, please keep us appraised of the current situation, and keep us up-to-date on the developments in your areas of interest. The only way this stuff gets improved is by direct involvement (you modifying the code), or keeping on top of the people who do. And perhaps, as things move along, if Warren can get up out of the water high enough to take another breath of air, he'll be able to add some of these packages

Jon

No computer is magic, no operating system is magic, no website is magic. They all require human interaction, thought, and responsibility to work.

I think this thread has thrown up some very good points and arguments looking from different viewpoints.

What could be done better immediately is to maintain a comprehensive list of upgraded packages (just download links, not necessarily repositories) which people have found to work under Mepis. These would of course not be officially maintained or guaranteed, but come with a "health warning" - use at your own risk. For starters, we have:

1. OpenOffice.org 2.2 (alienized version)
2. Thunderbird 2.0 (zipped binaries)
3. K3b 1.0.1 (deb)
4. Kaffeine 0.8.4 (deb from Ubuntu Dapper)
5. etc

They could possibly be given a 'star rating', for example:
*** = no problems reported
** = works for most folks
* = some significant problems reported
etc

I know this isn't really what Jim is after, and I appreciate his point very well, but at least let's communicate better what we do have available!

I think this is not a feasible option though. For one, we have thousands of packages, and for two, users don't have the same systems.

What works for you could totally ruin my install, for instance. I know that is where the star rating idea comes in, but see my first point on that one; it is not doable to keep track of all those packages and their reports.

Unless you want to volunteer, that is

How, if you don't mind me asking?

I just downloaded the new Sidux 2007-2 Preview and booted into it.

It's *far* worse than I expected. The fonts are so tiny, that nobody with normal vision could possible consider them readable, and I don't own a magnifying glass for my monitor screen.

Heck, I'm thinking that maybe I should find a typical monitor and donate it (for example, a 17" monitor that runs at 1024x768).

It's got to have the worse font setup of any distro I have ever used (and I've got *hundreds* of CDs from distros I've tried in the past).

I looked through the Sidux monitor settings, KDE settings and more. I see nothing wrong with the way it's detecting my monitor (resolution, frequencies, etc.). But, the font size is unacceptable (to put it politely).

It also doesn't have an rt2570 driver built in (wireless not detected, modprobe rt2570 didn't work). They need to work on this one a *lot* more for sure.

Jim C.

Sidux 2007-02 is still a preview release
@Jim C. -- why not tell the Sidux developers your concerns?
I just looked -- you already told them and they offered help
Mike

Jim,

Noticed this in this month's Linux Format mag, an article on Digital Darkroom, a personal project of Lightzone developer Anton Kast, (thanks to reliance on Dave Coffin's dcraw program) so your input is very valuable to the Linux community!!!, check out the link at

http://lightcrafts.com/linux/

cheers
oldhoghead

Yes. I'm familiar with Lightzone.

I like bringing up that they charge for the Windows and Mac versions. But, they offer the Linux version at no charge (unsupported).

I personally don't like the User Interface and I can't seem to get used to their tools (like their "zone" system for tweaking the images). I haven't spent much time with it though. Some people seem to really like it, and I have noticed that it's a very fast browser if you have a lot of raw files.

Jim C.

What I did was to change the default dpi to 96 rather than the one that comes with sidux/kanotix 72 (I think). I also transferred my Mepis firefox settings in .mozilla/firefox/starnge folder number/prefs.js to sidux too.

I should also point out that I don't use kde, but fluxbox, so this may have a bearing on your font setup (not firefox though).

anticapitalista

Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.