Distro-hoppers anonymous

MarkW · 2026-03-11 18:29:56

Chicago and Auckland?

trinidad · 2026-03-11 18:32:35

Keep track of Jerry's tz (Linux Lite). I'm in CST.

TC

hhh · 2026-03-12 01:58:25

MarkW wrote:

... and Auckland?

Wisconsin, USA. But close on the beer-consumption scale, I'd guess. (source: I'm a former Twin Cities Minnesota resident who's been to Madison, had a girlfriend from NZ once, and can name my favorite Metalhead BL forum member)

Döbbie03 · 2026-03-12 04:49:46

What's this about Auckland? What a shithole.

Colonel Panic · 2026-03-12 10:46:48

trinidad wrote:

Did you choose install from a grub screen or from the running live ISO? On some distros the grub choice doesn't sort right and vice/versa. Just depends.
Currently working on Dev Excalibur. Fast system.
https://thumbs2.imgbox.com/7c/c6/6PeWwzCI_t.png
TC

Thanks for replying. I think it may have been from a grub screen, though I'm not sure and will check next time.

trinidad · 2026-03-12 11:02:08

I lived in Minneapolis one summer with my Aunt and cousins. Third grade or so. Never been to NZ. Never been out of the US except PR and the VI though I've been to every state except California, Alaska, Hawaii and Delaware. Moved to Milwaukee in High School. My three wives were all from Milwaukee. My kids live everywhere. Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Washington state, Colorado, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, PR and St. Thomas VI. I have cousins, Aunts, Uncles, nieces, nephews, and grandchildren in 33 states, PR, the VI, and Cuba. My Mother is still alive and lucid 95 years. She's still planning a revolutionary takeover.
TC

hhh · 2026-03-13 00:39:50

Döbbie03 wrote:

What's this about Auckland? What a shithole.

lol

Colonel Panic · 2026-03-14 16:21:15

I've installed MX again and gone back a version - so I'm on 23.6 (Bookworm), with Melodie's Openbox-based desktop called Bento.

The advantage of using the older version is that I can still install and use 32-bit software, such as Icedove (which for me is still by far the easiest and most convenient e-mail client to use).

So far everything's working great except that because it's the Bento version it's not exactly flush with included software, so I had to install quite a lot of things myself - there's no office suite as standard, for example. It doesn't take long though and if I was smart about it I could probably write a script to install several packages at once.

[A further note; its a pain in the arse trying to edit anything on Melodie's version, so I cheated and installed Openbox (plus the files I had from earlier) in the version of MX 23 I got from a magazine cover disk,

Maybe having just a handful of distros on my hard drive is the way I'll go in future because it takes so long to set everything up the way I want it in a new distro.]

Last edited by Colonel Panic (2026-03-15 21:41:50)

Colonel Panic · 2026-03-17 20:36:55

I've just installed EndeavourOS Ganymede from a magazine cover disk. As most people will know, it's an Arch-based distro with KDE.

It certainly looks impressive and I like the name, but the amount of software it comes with as standard is positively miserly - no e-mail client or office suite, for example. Is this the norm now?

Last edited by Colonel Panic (2026-03-17 20:39:26)

PackRat · 2026-03-17 22:13:07

Colonel Panic wrote:

I've just installed EndeavourOS Ganymede from a magazine cover disk. As most people will know, it's an Arch-based distro with KDE.
It certainly looks impressive and I like the name, but the amount of software it comes with as standard is positively miserly - no e-mail client or office suite, for example. Is this the norm now?

Did you do an offline install? That just installs the software from the live session and you're restricted to plasma desktop.

If you do the online install, you should have been able to select from several desktops, as well as, select additional software during the install. There is a screen with a tree view to add software. There are various categories - Printing Support, Media, Mail etc ....

Same applies to CachyOS.

But yes, many distros and their derivatives (Arch being one) keep the install basic so that the users can build their preferred system post-install. It also lowers the payload of the iso. Some of these distros with X (Wayland) and software bundles are pushing 3GB now. Pretty easy to exceed the size of a DVD these days.

Colonel Panic · 2026-03-18 04:38:03

PackRat wrote:

Colonel Panic wrote:
I've just installed EndeavourOS Ganymede from a magazine cover disk. As most people will know, it's an Arch-based distro with KDE.
It certainly looks impressive and I like the name, but the amount of software it comes with as standard is positively miserly - no e-mail client or office suite, for example. Is this the norm now?
Did you do an offline install? That just installs the software from the live session and you're restricted to plasma desktop.
If you do the online install, you should have been able to select from several desktops, as well as, select additional software during the install. There is a screen with a tree view to add software. There are various categories - Printing Support, Media, Mail etc ....
Same applies to CachyOS.
But yes, many distros and their derivatives (Arch being one) keep the install basic so that the users can build their preferred system post-install. It also lowers the payload of the iso. Some of these distros with X (Wayland) and software bundles are pushing 3GB now. Pretty easy to exceed the size of a DVD these days.

Thanks for replying, and yes, that would explain it. I couldn't do an online install because the live disk installer didn't pick up my network card - I get this a lot with Arch-based distros. I could only log in and start browsing once I'd installed the distro to the hard drive.

Last edited by Colonel Panic (2026-03-18 04:38:58)

Colonel Panic · 2026-03-23 11:22:57

Getting problems again with distros rebooting for no obvious reason (I lost nearly half an hour's work the last time), so I'm going to be super picky about what distros I use for the time being until it is sorted out. Even if it's boring and fiddly at times (which it probably will be).

Last edited by Colonel Panic (2026-03-23 11:27:03)

Colonel Panic · 2026-03-26 08:08:54

Is Slackware 14.2, or any distro based on it, still usable in 2026? My answer is - yes, but only just.

(I'm in Slackel KDE, the latest version of which is based on 14.2.)

Firefox works as a binary from the /opt folder, as do Seamonkey, Waterfox and even Zen; those are enough for me to do what I need to do online.

Pale Moon keeps crashing every time I try to do something with it, so I've written that one off in this system; Basilisk works but can't access certain sites because it gets flagged up as an old browser..

Slackel comes with Libre Office already installed, so no problem there.

Last edited by Colonel Panic (2026-03-26 18:42:10)

chroot · 2026-03-26 12:57:13

Colonel Panic wrote:

Is Slackware 14.2, or any distro based on it, still usable in 2026? My answer is - yes, but only just.
(I'm in Slackel KDE, the latest version of which is based on 14.2.)
Firefox works as a binary from the /opt folder, as do Seamonkey, Waterfox and even Zen; those are enough for me to do what I need to do online.
Pale Moon keeps crashing every time I try to do something with it, so I've written that one off in this system; Basilisk works but can't access certain sites because it gets flagged up ans an old browser..
Slackel comes with Libre Office already installed, so no problem there.

Any particular reason(s) that you decided to stick with 14.2, not upgrading to 15.0 or current?

greenjeans · 2026-03-26 17:07:42

Colonel Panic wrote:

the amount of software it comes with as standard is positively miserly - no e-mail client or office suite, for example. Is this the norm now?

I make two versions of my own project distro, one is a mini with just infrastructure and no major programs at all, no browser or graphics or office stuff at all. I also make a max version with the most commonly used programs added.

As far as the ratio, the mini gets twice as many downloads as the max.

Way more people than anyone seems to understand, prefer to choose their own programs and have strong opinions about them, the mini gives them a clean slate so they don't have to uninstall a bunch of things they don't want. I prefer 'em myself bigly.

Colonel Panic · 2026-03-26 18:41:13

chroot wrote:

Colonel Panic wrote:
Is Slackware 14.2, or any distro based on it, still usable in 2026? My answer is - yes, but only just.
(I'm in Slackel KDE, the latest version of which is based on 14.2.)
Firefox works as a binary from the /opt folder, as do Seamonkey, Waterfox and even Zen; those are enough for me to do what I need to do online.
Pale Moon keeps crashing every time I try to do something with it, so I've written that one off in this system; Basilisk works but can't access certain sites because it gets flagged up ans an old browser..
Slackel comes with Libre Office already installed, so no problem there.
Any particular reason(s) that you decided to stick with 14.2, not upgrading to 15.0 or current?

Thanks for asking. Two reasons;

1 / I didn't know that the distro was based on Slack 14.2 before I downloaded it, and

2 / For that particular flavour of Slackel (KDE), there is no more recent version than the one based on Slack 14.2. I think the Slackel devs are now focusing exclusively on the Openbox flavour of their distro and letting the others fall by the wayside.

Also, there are occasional examples where the newer program is a downgrade on the older one (which shipped with 14.2). I'm thinking in particular of Thunderbird; I find the version that shipped with Slack 14.2 much easier to set up and use than modern versions of it (but that's a discussion for another thread).

Last edited by Colonel Panic (2026-03-26 19:45:33)

Colonel Panic · 2026-03-26 18:46:45

greenjeans wrote:

Colonel Panic wrote:
the amount of software it comes with as standard is positively miserly - no e-mail client or office suite, for example. Is this the norm now?
I make two versions of my own project distro, one is a mini with just infrastructure and no major programs at all, no browser or graphics or office stuff at all. I also make a max version with the most commonly used programs added.
As far as the ratio, the mini gets twice as many downloads as the max.
Way more people than anyone seems to understand, prefer to choose their own programs and have strong opinions about them, the mini gives them a clean slate so they don't have to uninstall a bunch of things they don't want. I prefer 'em myself bigly.

Thanks for that explanation. I agree but I think there is and should be room for both - minimalist distros such as Zenwalk, which promise an application (and only one) for each purpose, and "kitchen sink" distros like Emmabuntus which offer almost everything you can think of and are intended for situations where you may not have a working internet connection and have to install every program you want offline..

PCLinuxOS used to offer a distro called The Full Monty, which was enormous and contained a variety of different programs for each function (such as a variety of browsers etc.). They've stopped making it now, possibly because it was a pain to troubleshoot.

Last edited by Colonel Panic (2026-03-26 19:44:24)

greenjeans · Yesterday 14:27:13

Colonel Panic wrote:

PCLinuxOS used to offer a distro called The Full Monty, which was enormous and contained a variety of different programs for each function (such as a variety of browsers etc.). They've stopped making it now, possibly because it was a pain to troubleshoot.

They also used to make one called the ZEN mini, based on gnome2, made by a really cool and smart guy who went by the handle "Siamer". All the infrastructure and none of the programs, the perfect starter for neophyte "builders" like myself, and it had a substantial following based on downloads and activity. But gnome 3 disgusted both gnome devs at Pclos so bad they gave up making gnome spins and went to Arch I believe. I made the last (unofficlal) gnome2 versions both mini and max myself after they left.

Melodie remembers, she was there making the Openbox versions at the time, I should have listened to her back then and really given Openbox a try.

I always say to myself when thinking about a given detail: Is this something the user should be deciding for themselves? Or do I make the call based upon what works best with this system? It's a fine line, one I agonize over frequently.

Colonel Panic · Yesterday 19:19:43

greenjeans wrote:

PCLinuxOS used to offer a distro called The Full Monty, which was enormous and contained a variety of different programs for each function (such as a variety of browsers etc.). They've stopped making it now, possibly because it was a pain to troubleshoot.
They also used to make one called the ZEN mini, based on gnome2, made by a really cool and smart guy who went by the handle "Siamer". All the infrastructure and none of the programs, the perfect starter for neophyte "builders" like myself, and it had a substantial following based on downloads and activity. But gnome 3 disgusted both gnome devs at Pclos so bad they gave up making gnome spins and went to Arch I believe. I made the last (unofficlal) gnome2 versions both mini and max myself after they left.
Melodie remembers, she was there making the Openbox versions at the time, I should have listened to her back then and really given Openbox a try.
I always say to myself when thinking about a given detail: Is this something the user should be deciding for themselves? Or do I make the call based upon what works best with this system? It's a fine line, one I agonize over frequently.

Thanks for replying, and I agree that Gnome 3 is a pain to use. I've tried to use it a couple of times, and always given up; the last time was in Debian Exton.

I've still got a couple of Melodie's respins on my drive, the ones she did on Ubuntu 24 LTS and MX 23; they look good (she's keen on blues and yellows) and work well. I think she's given up doing that now but she has posted the files she uses on Github in case anyone else wants to have a ago with them.

On this part of your post;

"I always say to myself when thinking about a given detail: Is this something the user should be deciding for themselves? Or do I make the call based upon what works best with this system? It's a fine line, one I agonize over frequently."

I agree.

What I've got at the moment for the times I'm trying to put my own setup together instead of relying on someone else's, is a couple of files each for Openbox and Fluxbox (a configuration file and a menu file), which more or less work, and one for Spectrwm as well when I feel like using a tiling manager; and I combine them all with either Tint2 or LXPanel, GKrellm, Rofi and a couple of menuing programs, dmenu and jgmenu.

All of that together gives me a setup that's both comprehensive, in that it does everything I want (system monitoring, launching and shutting down programs and moving and resizing windows), and is easy to use as well. The trouble is that I haven't yet managed to make any of the ones I've put together that way look slick; they work but just look "clunky."

Or, I use a setup that the distro's devs have designed (such as the one for the distro I'm using now, Extrox), which looks good, and just accept that the way it operates isn't going to be exactly to my liking.

I've never yet managed to find a way to have both (excellent looks and optimum functionality); I envy those who have.

Last edited by Colonel Panic (Today 07:22:33)

#2841 2026-03-11 18:29:56

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2842 2026-03-11 18:32:35

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2843 2026-03-12 01:58:25

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2844 2026-03-12 04:49:46

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2845 2026-03-12 10:46:48

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2846 2026-03-12 11:02:08

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2847 2026-03-13 00:39:50

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2848 2026-03-14 16:21:15

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2849 2026-03-17 20:36:55

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2850 2026-03-17 22:13:07

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2851 2026-03-18 04:38:03

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2852 2026-03-23 11:22:57

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2853 2026-03-26 08:08:54

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2854 2026-03-26 12:57:13

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2855 2026-03-26 17:07:42

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2856 2026-03-26 18:41:13

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2857 2026-03-26 18:46:45

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2858 Yesterday 14:27:13

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#2859 Yesterday 19:19:43

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

Board footer