What would you use if Porteus was not available?

Non release banter
fulalas
DEV Team
DEV Team
Posts: 769
Joined: 26 Oct 2016, 15:34
Distribution: Porteus
Location: Brazil

Re: What would you use if Porteus was not available?

Post#61 by fulalas » 13 Jul 2017, 10:21

Evan wrote:If i went through the entire list it would sound like i was a Porteus Hater when i'm not. :)
Relax. I don't judge you. It's not a problem if each one of us has an opinion as long as we keep respect :good:
Evan wrote:Modern Linux desktops like Mint / Ubuntu look better on High DPI including more usage of GTK3 themes instead of GTK2,
I think this migration from GTK2 to GTK3 is a natural path that all apps GTK based are passing through right now -- and some of them are moving to Qt. So I don't think this has much to do with big distros. What I know for sure is that Mate, Xfce, LXQt and Porteus in general can live now without GTK2. :)
Evan wrote:Fully working Nvidia drivers
This is indeed a problem with Porteus, since we need to count on the guys who have Nvidia cards and also time/patience/knowledge to build the drivers. I don't know an easy way to solve this.
Evan wrote:fully working Intel micro codes
What kind of micro codes? Could we use it on Porteus too? I'm asking because I'm not familiar with this.
Evan wrote:fully working kernel that includes things like Apparmor for sandboxing
What's this?
Evan wrote:a most websites have an Ubuntu / Mint install file so all you have to do is click install, on the rare occasion you use command line it's for adding a PPA then it sets itself up
This is totally true! Porteus is not for beginners that want lots of different applications, since USM isn't that refined/up to date. Maybe we just need a bigger community so we can spread tasks and everyone can be happy :)
Evan wrote:Fairly recent up-to-date apps in the repository , a fuller list and faster releases of security patches.
Porteus usually is one of the fastest distros when regarding kernel update. Unfortunately brokenman had some time constraints this year, but do you remember last year? One version after another as soon as a new kernel was released. Debian based distros take waaaay longer to update. But let's consider that neko is always building the lastest kernels, I'm providing most recent LXQt updates and also Xorg/Mesa updates in a decent pace, besides other individual applications. Do you remember a topic where I showed that Porteus is faster than Lubuntu when it comes to 3D render? :)

Finally, I think Porteus will never be a fat distro as long as brokenman continues to be the chairman :good:

Evan
Warlord
Warlord
Posts: 519
Joined: 11 Apr 2016, 09:00
Distribution: Anything Cinnamon
Location: London

Re: What would you use if Porteus was not available?

Post#62 by Evan » 13 Jul 2017, 10:53

fulalas wrote:
Evan wrote:fully working Intel micro codes
What kind of micro codes? Could we use it on Porteus too? I'm asking because I'm not familiar with this.

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page= ... -Microcode

Not sure if AMD is supported yet but for the last couple of years Ubuntu has supported Intel micro code fixes that Motherboard Manufactures normally add when they update their Bios Fixes but they can also be loaded at kernel level.

On Ubuntu's driver list below the Video driver you are offered an option to install Intel bug fixes , not sure if this can be done with Porteus?
fulalas wrote:
Evan wrote:fully working kernel that includes things like Apparmor for sandboxing
What's this?
https://www.howtogeek.com/118222/htg-ex ... tu-system/

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AppArmor
AppArmor support was first introduced in Ubuntu 7.04, and is turned on by default in Ubuntu 7.10 and later. AppArmor confinement in Ubuntu is application specific with profiles available for specific binaries. With each release, more and more profiles are shipped by default, with more planned.
Current profiles
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/Kn ... orProfiles

Profiles to be added in later releases
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/Ro ... onfinement

Canonical Mainlines A Bunch Of Their AppArmor Changes For Linux 4.13
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page= ... Linux-4.13
The Linux 4.13 kernel that's in development will pick up a big code contribution from Canonical as they have prepped a lot of their AppArmor security changes for mainlining, some of which code has been sitting in Ubuntu's kernel build for years.

User avatar
francois
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 5073
Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 14:25
Distribution: kde xfce porteus manjaro kubun
Location: Enfin l'été, le changement climatique attendu: le soleil.

Re: What would you use if Porteus was not available?

Post#63 by francois » 13 Jul 2017, 12:15

@evan:
Some graphic drivers have always been a special case for linux. For each version of porteus, slackware, debian, ... ... they have to be built according to the kernel.

It has been sometime since I built the driver since I have my old Nvidia driver laptop. Then the procedure was to:
viewtopic.php?f=117&t=3978&start=60
1) find the right right driver for your card with lspci command
2) build the driver

Exception case for dual graphic card set-up:
http://forum.porteus.org/viewtopic.php? ... 014#p29082

Edit:
Found this thread on the topic where you exchanges much with fulalas.
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=6391&start=30

An update would be wonderful.
Voltaire: Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien.

fulalas
DEV Team
DEV Team
Posts: 769
Joined: 26 Oct 2016, 15:34
Distribution: Porteus
Location: Brazil

Re: What would you use if Porteus was not available?

Post#64 by fulalas » 13 Jul 2017, 23:43

@Evan, take a look: 'While microcode can be updated through the BIOS, the Linux kernel is also able to apply these updates during boot'. (source). So in this regard we're better served with Porteus than Debian based distros ;)

The idea of AppArmor is interesting, although it sounds like a bloatware for my taste. But I understand that for a common user it maybe useful. Don't you think Canonical shipping this is odd since at the same time they use systemd? :D

@francois, I don't have a Nvidia card anymore, so I depend on my GF's laptop to test that script. I can check later if it's still working, but if I could guess, I would say that nothing has changed. However, the problem with that script is that it requires too much work/knowledge from a common user. We need some GUI like neko's kernel builder.

Evan
Warlord
Warlord
Posts: 519
Joined: 11 Apr 2016, 09:00
Distribution: Anything Cinnamon
Location: London

Re: What would you use if Porteus was not available?

Post#65 by Evan » 14 Jul 2017, 00:05

fulalas wrote:@Evan, take a look: 'While microcode can be updated through the BIOS, the Linux kernel is also able to apply these updates during boot'. (source). So in this regard we're better served with Porteus than Debian based distros ;)
Ubuntu / mint and others update through the kernel instead of the Bios which was the point. Image :)
So in this regard we're better served with Porteus than Debian based distros ;)
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/microcode
Installation - For Intel processors, install the intel-ucode package, and continue reading. These updates must be enabled by adding /boot/intel-ucode.img as the first initrd in the bootloader config file. This is in addition to the normal initrd file.
How exactly is that easier than just ticking a selection box in Ubuntu? Image :) Image

@ francois »

I imagine you must be skim reading as i have absolutely no idea what your post about Porteus Nvidia has to do with Modern Linux desktops offering users a fully working Nvidia driver out of the box. :)

fulalas
DEV Team
DEV Team
Posts: 769
Joined: 26 Oct 2016, 15:34
Distribution: Porteus
Location: Brazil

Re: What would you use if Porteus was not available?

Post#66 by fulalas » 14 Jul 2017, 00:26

@Evan, since CPU microcodes can be inserted in Linux kernels, and since Porteus provides kernel updates in a quicker pace than Canonical, we're better served with Porteus in this regard. See? :) Also, bear in mind that these microcodes updates are usually something really small for specific scenarios that don't apply to most of the users (including the advanced ones!). In other words, don't mind about it. :good: This 'lastest version paranoia' can be too energy consuming, and for nothing :P

Evan
Warlord
Warlord
Posts: 519
Joined: 11 Apr 2016, 09:00
Distribution: Anything Cinnamon
Location: London

Re: What would you use if Porteus was not available?

Post#67 by Evan » 14 Jul 2017, 00:50

We seem to be having two separate conversations , how you want to use linux as opposed to what is easiest and least time consuming for the average user.....

Point and click will always win which is why Ubuntu has 40 million users and Mint gets over $10,000 per month in donations........

As Tonio pointed out even Tomas Matejicek, creator of Slax is now pushing Debian based distro's with his linux-live script as the easiest option for a custom live disk.

click , click ,click - copy - paste , 10 minutes later an Custom ISO , done

want to install / update software or add security updates , click , click ,click - copy - paste , 10 minutes later a new Custom ISO , done

:friends: :)

*edit*

For the microcode paranoid :wink: :D

Debian Warns Of Hyper Threading Issue With Intel Sky/Kaby Lake CPUs

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page= ... Bug-KBL095

Users are advised to get an updated BIOS/UEFI while for some Skylake CPUs the updated Intel microcode packages available on Linux have a fix.

raja
Black ninja
Black ninja
Posts: 54
Joined: 02 May 2017, 09:51
Distribution: v3.2.2-32bit and v3.2.2-64 bit
Location: Chennai,India

Re: What would you use if Porteus was not available?

Post#68 by raja » 14 Jul 2017, 09:02

I was using Ubuntu 12.04 with Kernel 2.6 from 2012. A perfect replacement for Windows users, in old machines. As Evan says, update,adding new programs are a breeze. It was running beautifully. I took out the old 16 GB Pen Drive( Ubuntu 12.04) y'day,laying idle for few years and booted this Laptop. Perfect. Pressed update, it said, 1 GB download and several hours for replacing modules, cancelled the update, but found it has silently updated Kernel to 3.2.

This is because of single agency control.

I found one MPV-32 bit module here. It has only the MPV bin file. Many will be disappointed with such. A Slackware module 'mpv-0.15.0-i686-1jsc.txz' , which I tested in v3.1-32 bit, lists so many dependency files and is a big struggle to collect all. USM v3.17 in my machine is a big waste.

But, if you are content with the original tested Porteus, I must admit it runs very fast and meets all basic requirement of an user..

Evan
Warlord
Warlord
Posts: 519
Joined: 11 Apr 2016, 09:00
Distribution: Anything Cinnamon
Location: London

Re: What would you use if Porteus was not available?

Post#69 by Evan » 14 Jul 2017, 10:22

raja wrote:Pressed update, it said, 1 GB download and several hours for replacing modules, cancelled the update, but found it has silently updated Kernel to 3.2.
LOL , Ubuntu's 'we will update everything' approach annoys the crap out of Mint users so they have a different update manger that numbers things from critical to why bother. :D

Evan
Warlord
Warlord
Posts: 519
Joined: 11 Apr 2016, 09:00
Distribution: Anything Cinnamon
Location: London

Re: What would you use if Porteus was not available?

Post#70 by Evan » 14 Jul 2017, 22:07

Slax - Questionnaire results - over 1250 responses

http://www.tomas-m.com/blog/23002-Quest ... sults.html
2. Slax base - keeping Slackware?

Almost 84% of all respondents do not care if Slax is based on Slackware. This means that I can do practically anything when selecting the base for Slax. To be honest I didn't decide yet if I want to switch. The problem with Slackware is that there is no way to get extra software easily. I am considering Debian and Gentoo at the moment.

3. Slax size

Only 5% of users prefer Slax to keep <200MB size. And 63% of users can accept size over 500MB. So I think targetting to ~500MB or ~700MB (to fit a regular CD) may be the best decision. I think 700MB is not such a deal nowadays. If I can put more data on file, it will mean less work for me optimizing the size.
84% don't care for Slackware and 63% can accept size over 500MB -------------------------^

Give in and embrace point and click. :)

fulalas
DEV Team
DEV Team
Posts: 769
Joined: 26 Oct 2016, 15:34
Distribution: Porteus
Location: Brazil

Re: What would you use if Porteus was not available?

Post#71 by fulalas » 15 Jul 2017, 00:20

Slax wrote:Only 5% of users prefer Slax to keep <200MB size. And 63% of users can accept size over 500MB. [...] If I can put more data on file, it will mean less work for me optimizing the size.
Majority of people are simply stupid. We all know that, even when we're part of this majority :D

Let's remember the dawn of MSN. The Microsoft program was worse in absolutely all aspects when compared to ICQ: it didn't support offline messages, it didn't allow sending any kind of file, it was bigger, heavier, slow to install (sometimes it was stuck in a such way that you need to reinstall the whole Windows!), and I can continue listing all the issues. The same thing happens now with WhatsApp vs Telegram, where Telegram is better in basically everything. And what about Facebook? It's crap in almost all aspects: it's slow, the interface is terrible and so on. My point: people don't know shit so they say anything just to continue clicking, buying and showing the world how they are amazing.

Tonio
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 266
Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 16:37
Distribution: Slackware,porteus,FreeBSD,Slax
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: What would you use if Porteus was not available?

Post#72 by Tonio » 15 Jul 2017, 01:58

Point and Click will always win
:D
This is definitely True! There is Mint, Ubuntu and Debian at the top of the ratings at Distrowatch. They have thousands of distributions based on them because they will hold your hand and you click, click, click, ..., click^n and be happy. It reminded me of a famous quote
SMITH & WESSON
The original point and click interface.
Cheers!

Evan
Warlord
Warlord
Posts: 519
Joined: 11 Apr 2016, 09:00
Distribution: Anything Cinnamon
Location: London

Re: What would you use if Porteus was not available?

Post#73 by Evan » 15 Jul 2017, 03:05

Tonio wrote:
SMITH & WESSON
The original point and click interface.
Cheers!
LOL :D

fulalas
DEV Team
DEV Team
Posts: 769
Joined: 26 Oct 2016, 15:34
Distribution: Porteus
Location: Brazil

Re: What would you use if Porteus was not available?

Post#74 by fulalas » 15 Jul 2017, 09:28

'Most Linux distros are made such a way you cannot upgrade their individual core components (like kernel, glibc, Xorg, Xorg video drivers, Mesa drivers, etc.) without upgrading your whole system. Also if you have brand new hardware oftentimes you cannot install current Linux distros because almost all of them (aside from rare exceptions) don't incorporate the newest kernel release.
[...]
making binaries for Linux desktop applications is a major fucking pain in the ass. You don’t make binaries for Linux, you make binaries for Fedora 19, Fedora 20 [...]. Debian Stable has libraries that are so old that anything built in the last century doesn't work.
[...]
some bugs are now ten years old with over several dozens of duplicates and no one is working on them. KDE/Gnome/etc. developers are busy adding new features and breaking old APIs.
[...]
KDE is spiralling out of control (besides its code quality is beyond horrible [...]): people refuse to maintain literally hundreds of KDE packages.
[...]
Open Source developers usually don't care about applications behaviour beyond their own usage scenarios
Source: https://itvision.altervista.org/why.lin ... rrent.html

Plus: 'All native Linux filesystems are case sensitive about filenames which utterly confuses most users. This wonderful peculiarity doesn't have any sensible rationale.'

Hahaha! So true! I've seen the same file in the same folder, but, hey, there was one of the character which was low case and I had to read it so many times until I notice that! What's the meaning of this feature, for Newton's sake?

And one thing that I can't understand: why do we need to recompile drivers when we update Linux kernel? In Windows there's no such a thing. In fact, sometimes you can even use in Windows version A a driver designed for Windows version B. :unknown:

Tonio
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 266
Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 16:37
Distribution: Slackware,porteus,FreeBSD,Slax
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: What would you use if Porteus was not available?

Post#75 by Tonio » 15 Jul 2017, 11:32

fulalas wrote: And one thing that I can't understand: why do we need to recompile drivers when we update Linux kernel?
The driver needs to match the running kernel. If one does not want to recompile, then having dkms, dynamic kernel ... when we boot our new shiny kernel the driver is compiled against the running kernel and everything should work, but we need to have at least the crippled kernel sources. For nvidia, usually the drivers have to sadly be rebuilt against the new kernel. If the drivers do not match, then a kernel panic can occur or a simple black screen. If the driver loads, then you may be lucky or have the dkms enabled which builds the driver. Many moons ago, I had to compile code to be able to connect to internet with dialup. The drivers had to be built everytime I updated the kernel. Interesting times.
Cheers!

Post Reply