Should MEPIS change to the Ubuntu kernel?

That isn't the point.
The question asks if Warren should continue using the Debian sources for the DCC kernel or whether to use the Ubuntu ones.
Many have posted that the Ubuntu sources are NOT Debian compatible.
Is that really true? I don't know.
If it is, then Debian all the way for me.
If it's not true, then it doesn't really matter, (though I would prefer Warren to stick with Debian)

"Many have posted that the Ubuntu sources are NOT Debian compatible.
Is that really true? I don't know."

My guess is that if something is not compatible is not because of the kernel (except of course the drivers) it's because of the package version and libraries... but what do I know....

Maybe someone who knows should explain better.

--
Post questions on www.mepislovers.org too.
Check out our wiki: www.mepislovers-wiki.org

So this is actually a BIG non-issue, since Mepis was not using Debian kernel ANYWAY.

Then I don't have a problem at all with using Ubuntu's sources for the Mepis released kernels or the DCC kernels especially if it has better hardware support.

The Guru Warren drives this Ashram called Mepis, I concur with his direction for the construction of my adobe dwelling....

--
I shot an arrow into the air. It stuck! Anon

Ubuntu, indeed, seems to have a more stable hardware support. The SOUND, for instance, seems to be a nagging problem for MEPIS. I don't know why. So, my vote would be to use Ubuntu kernel, but STICK to Debian for everything else. That is, if it would improve the hardware support.

I trust Warren's judgment completely to do what's best!
Jim Adams

It doesn't make sence changing horses in mid stream. no matter what direction Mepis ultimatly heads.
Debian and Red Hat have the best file base to work from.
Streight Debian is still a little hard for me to diguest, that's why I've taste tested Knoppix, DamnSmall and now Mepis, which is why I'm here, in a nut shell.
The Udev problems still needs to be addressed and resolved (IMO), if swapping kernels to DCC allows this to happen, than my answer is fine.

I'm sure mepis could do a hell of alot better than ubuntu has done with kubuntu, but the ubuntu debian tweaked packages suck. ubuntu does not work on all my computers like mepis does. If ever they made that switch i would move to kanotix, i have tried ubuntu and do not like anything about it.

It needs to be clarified here that the current Mepis kernel is based on Debian source

I started with Mepis becuase it was touted to have the best hardware detection, best for the newbie and based on Debian.
i was impressed with the initiative of the DCC and upset with Shuttleworth's statement that it would fail.
Now Mepis wants to use Ubuntu's kernel because it has better hardware detection?
Why not just use Ubuntu, add KDE 5, and make it feel like Mepis?
After 40 weeks using Linux (still a newbie), I find that there is not a huge difference between Distros in usability, and the ones i have tried are equally good at detection. Appearance is easily changed.
I tried Ubuntu and just didn't like the feel (personal). Tried Kanotix while Mepis was having issues with printers, and love it. Kanotix, so far,is still based on Debian-Sid.
The vote is amost tied, Warren needs to do what is best for his Distro, but I will not be along for the ride. No big loss!

If Warren likes the Ubuntu kernel and transition is no more than a new ISO to load, then it is OK with me. I still want KDE (rather than Gnome). I don't want any of the dumb-down Ubuntu features such as hidden SA password.

If the MEPIS feature set would change along with the kernel, then I hope that Warren would first stablize SimplyMEPIS 3.4 so that I could stick with it.

I think it should remain with Debian and stop trying to be all things to all people. Not everyone will be pleased with something about the distro. That's just the way it is.

I personally hope Warren takes Mepis back to the spot before the DCC alliance when Mepis "just worked".

I remember when Mepis looked nothing like Debian and the only thing remotely related to Debian was the apt-get system. I remember when Mepis simply detected my hardware based on programming (I think is is called Meauto) created by Warren.

Kernels can be compiled and patched as necessary to handle hardware so I think if Warren really wanted too he could just go back to what worked in the past an be done with it. LSB compliance is needed but not all the other junk.

Warren, please develop a LSB compliant kernel of your own that still allows the use of the apt dpkg system developed by Debian. IF that is not feasible, stick with the Debian kernel base.

In Linux Format 74 (Dec 2005), the article on pp 6-7 talked about the DCC and how MEPIS was the first to "take advantage" of it. At the end of the article, Shuttleworth was cited as saying that the DCC "will fail -- time will tell." Ian Murdock then retorted that Ubuntu was making a "huge mistake."

My opinion is this: why the polemic?! If FOSS is about creating and doing things better, then there shouldn't be any problem with using the Ubuntu kernel for MEPIS, right? I don't think there'd be major changes, in appearance especially, although I'm not exactly titillated about the Ubuntu kernel's hardware detection (just look at their forums!). Still, if Warren believes there's something good to be had there, then MEPIS should go where the better and more effective tools are.

- STYNGERSMASH -

In order to vote on this I need more information about the Pro's and Con's of the considered change.

I hope that someone more knowledgable about the topic will enlighten us. So that we too can vote in an informed manner.

Without more information I cannot cast a vote on this topic. I do hope that an objective individual - or baring that, a couple of less than impartial individuals for each side - will take the time to educate the rest of us.

Thank You

hmmm, immediate thought was 'no way, if i wanted to use ubuntu then i'd be using it.', then i buggered off and read the articles.
still haven't voted yet, but thought i'd air my thoughts about it and see whats said.
A huge amount of ubuntu's work goes straight back into debian (see xorg transition) and they're pushing ahead faster than debian @ the moment with guaranteed 6 month release cycles etc. (partly because they nabbed a load of debian developers, i know, but like it or lump it thats how it is). Some work doesn't (kde & gcc4 transition was handled differently, but ubuntu was out the door faster).
Ubuntu's kernel is going to be the next base for the DCC kernel. Aparently even if its not and the DCC always rolls its own then it'll still be a break from pure debian.
So, unless i get it wrong, its actually a discussion about whether or not to let an outfit with bigger resources build the kernel at the basic level, which implies we should go ubuntu.
On the bigger level of getting debian && all offshoots (including ubuntu) certifiable by software vendors and so increase the uptake of debian it comes down to the argument of whether debian and offshoots should be binary compatible or source compatible, shuttleworth thinks source, others binary. does it matter that much? seems like it, vmware isn't certified on debian because of binary incompatibilities, beta 5.5 needed me to mangle their perl scripts so i could recompile network drivers and reload them each boot in the background, nvidia on the other hand can cope with just having the kernel source code handy, much more elegant solution but the kernel doesn't have a ton of libraries that it relies on, which the bigger apps do. anything in c++ (ie. qt, kde etc etc) needs all libraries to be built by the same compiler version because of the way changes to gcc keep knocking on, so i don't see the source compatibility workable in this case unless each library also has the -dev version installed as well.
On the flip side to that, though, if ubuntu becomes incrementally DCC compliant by assimilation isn't that a good thing?
AAArgh, still don't know.
sorry about rant, its 6 in the morning, but i'm welcoming peoples thoughts....

btw, forgot to say, i'm liking this new amount of 'asking the users their opoinions' and general developer interaction, i know it takes your time keeping folks informed but its really good to see

Tried UBUNTU live CD but it would not give me full screen on my NEC VERSA SX laptop.
Posture Pain Specialist

ok, had a couple of coffees and voted don't care as long as it works. It really does seem too be a non issue at the basic level, and at the politics level its of microscopic importance.
do whats best for the distro.

Well I'm going to speak for those who miss a win4lin enabled kernel.
The DCC arrangement put that out of reach.
I'm still using win4lin on a couple of old installs to run W98SE for a couple of programs that won't play well with wine.
ie Australian Tax Office software
Oziexplorer - read electronic maps with this
Promed Clinical (a medical program, won't be in most of your important lists)
I've trialled that program which can run WinXP and it wastes my time (even with the accelerator). I haven't gone the VMWare path.
So I would choose one kernel over the other according to the availability of win4lin.
As far as I can tell, neither has it.

Well, my all-or-nothing criterion for using Mepis will be that the DCC -alliance does not mean, that using a vanilla-kernel, say from the debian-pools is no more possible. All I need is the possibility to patch a generic kernel with a win4lin-patch and compile it (and install it) by myself. I don't need a prefabricated kernel which supports Win4Lin out-of-the-box.

So, my questions are: will the upcoming Mepis allow this, and will the developers answer my questions, just in case?

-jesko

The primary target of a linux distro is probably its efficiency. Why creating the wheel when it already exists, why making different only to be different ?
To spend more time on a subject having got its solution is loosing time for something else !
Anyway, Ubuntu is made from and with Debian like Mepis, in a such context everybody should be happy to stay within "his" Mepis with, of course with something "special" "?? la sauce" Warren ! http://www.mepis.org/misc/smileys/wink.png

Being very selfish, I've never managed to get Unbuntu to install on my PC (tried both Hedgehog and Badger versions severial times); whereas Mepis installs easly. So no contest, keep Mepis as-is.

I rely on Mepis to be my 'go to' guy. I know that if I install Mepis on ANY of my computers, it will work just fine, with a minimum of effort by me. Frankly, having used Ubuntu and Kubuntu, they do NOT work as reliably as any Mepis distro I've used. They certainly are not as robust. I find I have more trouble with adding different software to Ub and Kub than I ever did with Mepis.

I don't know enough to make such a choice, although I did vote that as long as it works, I didn't care. I've tried Ubuntu a few times and don't like it. It did odd things with my wireless (put it on eth2 instead of eth1 and didn't activate on boot). Mepis has worked on all my pc's including my old AMD k6 450, with all its variety of scavenged and cheap parts (sounds cards, video cards, etc). I wouldn't want that to change. The Mepis 3.4.3 rc3 does have some isuse and I hope those are worked out, but I wouldn't want Mepis to turn into something we all don't recognize.

Not sure either about the quality of HW detection in Ubuntu. Over all GNU/Linux distros I tried on LiveCDs last summer, before choosing MEPIS, Ubuntu was the only distro that could not even boot a X server on my 2-year-old laptop, no matter what driver I chose, even the generic ones. Not to mention the booting process was very slow.

I chose MEPIS because it works well and it is no Free Software extremist: the LiveCD already contains NTFS support, MP3 support, fast binary drivers for the graphics card instead slow FLOSS drivers that don't support recent models at real-life speeds. It's perfectly compatible with Debian, now that I've installed MEPIS, I use nearly only Debian unstable packages, without major issues.
Thanks warren for your work on MEPIS !

After thinking it over, I voted 'I don't care'.... If you see a pretty lady, you don't care about her name....

I remember Warren predicting on the Tech Show that in a number of years there would be a shakeout in distros. I guess he's right. The Linux landscape is too fragmented today to make big decisive steps forwards.

Mepis has some outstanding qualities compared to Ubuntu. And probably Ubuntu has the edge on Mepis in some respects. If the kernel is one of them, then by all means use it.

But please guys, keep working on improvement. I think Mepis always has had better support for wireless and softmodems than Ubuntu. Let this not be a change that's good for some and bad for others, but use synergy to make it better for all.

Newbie or not Newbie, there's always a question

Ok, first off I'd like to say this is the exact reason why Linux hasn't moved faster. Everyone has their own agendas that harm the whole community in th end. Warren is a good man, and the "Meauto" system was nice. I imagine maintaining it was incredibly difficult, and I do not even know if it is still in use - it might, or might not be.

We are not using the Debian kernel right now. Fact. We are using Debian Common Core Sources, and Nerim's Sources. Fact. Hardware compatibility is something that the Linux in general has wrestled with for literally a decade. Fact.

We are at a crossroads. Warren is a great man, but we need to come together in order to form a unified front on this. If we do not, we will not even get a second glance from new users. There needs to be complete absolution, stability, and performance improvement consistently.

If Warren can provide this, then so be it. If the millions of dollars that back Ubuntu can provide this better, then let it be. I stand for a universal, compatible, and most of all COMMON Core of software. It is more important than anything else.

Being a forward thinker, and being FORWARD minded is the only way you make change happen. If you must forego your small amount of uniqueness in order to achieve stability - then do it. For the sake of the future, do it. Do it, and do not forget your roots, and all will be well in the end.

I am a Linux newbie. So, I really don't understand the pros and cons of debian versus ubunto's kernel.

But, I would like to have repositories with the best options for installing new software (i.e., more choices).

Ubuntu seems to do much better than Mepis with hardware (for my machines). But, I don't know if this has anything to do with the kernel or not. For example, only Ubuntu and Kubuntu 5.10 supported my HP PSC1400 for a while. Only the more recent release candidates of Mepis 3.4.x work with it (and Kanotix didn't work with it until 2005-04 Release Candidate 24).

So, I don't have many distros to choose from if I want this printer to work. But, this kind of problem is probably related to Ubunto using newer packages sooner compared to other distros, versus the kernel itself.

From what I've seen, debian seems to be too far behind hardware in anything other than the "unstable" repositories if you want to use current printers, wireless cards, etc.

Jim C.

As long as MEPIS stays MEPIS, I did not like Ubuntu, I could not configure it to my needs.

I just voted the fourth choice: "don't care as long as it works well and is easy to use".

Seems to me that "engineering excellence over ideology" is the MEPIS philosophy. I have some sympathy for ideological FLOSS purists, you gotta watch that slippery slope. But in the end, I'd rather have a distro that comes with MP3 codecs, and RealPlayer and fast video drivers installed rather than total FLOSS purity. (And they should have kept Acrobat.)

There are, however, hard-headed engineering reasons for being able to say that you can install any package from a Debian repository. It's identified (along with multimedia support) by respondents to my questions about "why people prefer MEPIS". (I've asked in the forum in preparation for an article in the TUXmagazine "Distro Smackdown".)

Many posters are saying "we don't know enough", and the main thing I don't know is, "will this break the truth of the flat statment that you can install any Debian package from the main Debian repositories?"

If the answer is "yes, some will stop working, that's the price we're paying for (allegedly) better hardware support", then I'd say that price is too high on both the "Works well" and "Easy-to-use" engineering criteria. NOTHING is worse than installing something and seeing error messages and spending the evening dicking with libraries you don't understand.

But if the only issue here is Linux politics and the political incorrectness of using Ubuntu code, then Warren shouldn't worry about it.

If somebody can just clarify the issue of it still running ANY Debian repo package, I think the huge majority of the MEPIS user community will know how to vote.