Subj : Re: For you SBBS Sysops o
To : Accession
From : Gamgee
Date : Sat Jun 29 2024 01:14 pm
-=> Accession wrote to Gamgee <=-
Ac> On Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:30:00 -0500, you wrote:
G> Interesting - I haven't heard of that happening. I've not used Ubuntu for
G> more than a few minutes at a time, and not long enough to upgrade it.
Ac> I'm not sure that's a recent thing, any more. It was back when Linux
Ac> devs couldn't get their heads around proprietary graphics drivers (and
Ac> maybe still can't). Now that they've gone mostly open source with
Ac> those, the chances of that happening is far less than it used to be.
Yes, I would agree with all of that. Graphics drivers almost certainly
the cause of such problems, and many others.
G> I need to give that Devuan a look one of these days. Debian without
G> 'systemd', sounds like a winner. I've been a Slackware user for a couple
G> of decades, and
G> still am, mostly; although I'm starting to use MX Linux on a few machines,
G> including this new Framework laptop I'm on now. Really like it a lot, it's
G> another Debian descendant without systemd.
Ac> Not sure what you have against systemd. I gladly switched over when it
Ac> was introduced, and have never had an issue. A lot less scripting
Ac> involved, that's for sure.
I guess it's mostly the (assumed) philosophy that "let us manage all
your startup processes the way we think is best, and you don't worry
about the details". I know that isn't quite accurate, because you can
of course tweak systemd like most anything else, but that's as close as
I can come to a reason. I like to know exactly what's happening and
have as much control over that as I can. Another claim is that systemd
does things "in parallel all at once" and thereby reduces boot time. I
don't care one little bit about that, as I don't reboot often and don't
care if it takes 12 seconds, or 14 seconds.
Ac> Anyway, the other day I was bored and installed Manjaro (Gnome) and
Ac> Manjaro (KDE) in a couple Virtualbox VMs, to see how that distro as
Ac> well as the latest and greatest from the two most popular desktop
Ac> environments were getting along these days. It was a much nicer
Ac> experience than I remember back when they first started (Manjaro, that
Ac> is, obviously KDE and Gnome are much older than that).
Yes, I've toyed with Manjaro a few times and liked it OK. I suppose
those are the two most popular desktops, with Gnome only being there
because of Ubuntu, IMHO. I used to love Gnome but it became so
dumbed-down looking (I think it looks like a Fisher-Price toy) that I
moved (years ago) to XFCE and love it. Kind of Gnome-ish but light and
fast, and very configurable.
Next time you're bored, spin up a VM with MX Linux (xfce desktop) and
see what you think. It's about the only one I like any more.
Ac> I just have no need for a full GUI Linux desktop system at this point,
Ac> so I stick with Arch.
I use Linux as my daily driver, on mulitiple desktop/laptops, so it's
important to me. Servers/BBS run on Slackware, and even my daily laptop
has been Slackware for many years. Transitioning to a new laptop and
decided to go with MX Linux, as it's just less work. The only two
Windows computers in the house are my work laptop and my wife's desktop.
:-)
Regards,
Dan
... Clones are people two.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
� Synchronet � Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL
