From Linspire to PCLinuxOS via Mandriva 2008
Submitted by srlinuxx on Thu, 11/15/2007 - 16:45.
Well, I finally moved form my beloved Linspire! Took me a while but Linspire 6 didn't really get my laptop performing as well as it should. I hope that Linspire's new CEO Larry Kettler can get things moving.
There are several things that need to work for me to use Linspire. First off there's the awkward combination of an rt2500 chipset on my MSI wireless setup. Only distros based on Debian or Mandrake seem to be able to get it working. Next off there's the KDE desktop. No, I'll rewrite that, Gnome is just so boring! It's the Gordon Brown of the penguin world. So Ubuntu and Fedora is out of the show. Next there's audio. I bang my head when it comes to linux and audio. Maybe I just buy the most awkward hardware but getting audio running has been a real bugbear. I'm not just talking getting a sound but getting concurrent sounds from separate applications. One workaround to this is to use a distro such as the fantastic Dyne:bolic.
This uses the Jack server to allow you to route audio inputs and outputs. Fantastic, absolutely fantastic! Otherwise most desktops or window managers away from KDE or Gnome give me audio grief.
So that leaves me with Linspire, Mandriva and PCLinuxOS.
»
- Login to post comments
- 1814 reads
Cautious PcLos roll applications over Mandriva daring kernels ?
Mandriva being French loves safety factors of 1.0. Americans love safety factors of 2.0; but the British loves safety factors of 2.5.
With Linux 2.6.x kernels, the strategy has to be staying as long as possible with stable kernels, and roll the applications to their own latest versions. The waiting game is, looking over the shoulders of the team of Linux projects, and see which kernel versions they have caught up with?
When you roll the older applications on newer unstable kernels, you have left yourself with no safety factors for cohesiveness; bugs galore or kernel panic results.
You lost me...
So, are you trying to say the PCLinuxOS compiles new applications to an older Mandriva kernel? If so, you don't have a clue what you're talking about. PCLinuxOS uses it's own kernels. Originally, they were compiled and packaged by Texstar, then Ocilent1, and now Texstar has taken on the task again. These are not Mandriva kernels, but PCLinuxOS kernels.
For those unaware of how PCLinuxOS works off of Mandriva releases, PCLinuxOS starts with a base of Mandriva packages, originally Mandrake 9.2 and now Mandriva 2007. It uses its own kernel, KDE, and compiles many applications from Mandriva SRPMs after some bug fixes and some code unique to PCLinuxOS. It also adds some of its own applications, compiled from source. Some applications are modified from the Mandriva originals, such as the Mandriva Control Center, and some are just not used at all, but replaced with something different. For instance, PCLinuxOS uses Apt and Synaptic for package management, instead of URPMI and RPMDrake. It also uses applications compiled from SRPMS from other distros. Then, as time progresses, every package in the repository eventually gets replaced by newer ones, completely compiled from source.
PCLinuxOS does not upgrade the base, meaning the GCC version and other supporting libraries to compile against, until a complete rebase, which has only happened once with PCLinuxOS 2007. As such, each successive release is just updated packages and an updated kernel. Therefore, one can keep their current installation and upgrade via 'apt-get dist-upgrade' and have the very same installation as if they installed from the new ISO. That makes it a 'rolling upgrade' release distro. Upgrades are far less painful than other distros that completely reinvent the wheel with each new release.
The forest and the trees ? kernel and dependency issues ?
You are lost because you did not start with the source codes of Linus. And you have to decide which compiler version to use. Then you have either Mandriva or PcLos kernels.
Then you roll your applications; which depends on the team of the Linux projects(KDE, Gnome or Eclipse), which compiler or script versions they used.
If you neglected the support library and its versions, then you have a mess on your hands. Dependency is first and foremost; when you study Linux distros. Once dependency issues are cleared up, then the distro can be pretty much bug free(like kernel 2.4.22).
So, it is easier to use older kernels, and well established library(languages, scripts compilers) and other utility versions, and improve applications to have newer features. The applications make the distro, not the Linux kernels. Mandriva wins over Microsoft windows because of many(over 18,000+) free applications. But any Linux distro still has to offer better website creation applications or bookkeeping financial software(using wizards of database).
This software business, eventually leads to a study of social events and social club activities, which Mandriva used to be very good at.
You have no freakin' clue...
First, your information is waaay off.
There are not 18,000+ free applications, but rather 18,000+ packages. There is a huge difference. Packages include support applications, libraries, drivers, kernels, modules, artwork... These are not "applications". Sure, you can run the terminal and call cdrdao directly, but who does? It's a support application. There is far less actual "software".
Second, PCLinuxOS does start with Linus kernels. They have PCLinuxOS kernels, as well as unmolested official Linux kernels available in the repo.
Third, with package managers like Apt/Synaptic, URPMI/RPMDrake, YUM/Yumex, and others, package dependency problems have pretty much gone the way of the dinosaur. They've become like the Sasquatch...a rare sighting.
Lastly, what is your point? You babble on almost aimlessly. Are you referring to PCLinuxOS, Linspire, Mandriva, or just Linux in general? Where are you going with this? You make little sense at all.
Re: You have no freakin' clue...
You're just discovering that now?
atang1 has been posting aimless ponderings for ages. The sentence structure makes little sense, so I often ignore the majority of them. I just assume he (?) is drunk. I think that helps. (I'm not sure why he keeps using question marks.)
There are, on rare occasions where he speaks normal english (actually has some coherent structure!), which could suggest he sobered up for a bit. But for the most, its just his 2 cents of ramble.
Mentally, you should just see it like this: "Oh look, atang1 has posted some feedback. Hmmm, doesn't make much sense."...*ignore*.
Either that...
Or we might use a script that we wrote to take a vanilla kernel from linus into a "PCLOS" Kernel right?
Thus, we do start with the source kernels. They're available in vanilla format in synaptic (the ones we start with).
Insert_Ending_Here
Ignorance is a bliss ? Coarse language is your makeup ?
Using coarse language to hide your ignorance of how distros work with source codes is revealing yourself too much.
There is no room for coarse language here. If you do not understand technical language, just say so. The world is not all emotions, we do use technical language to do programming?
You have to at least understand kernel number that Linus released. And which GCC compilers you can use, down to v3.4 for ARM cpu. When you edit Linus source codes in a text editor, you have to call it a different number, same as what Fedora does. When you write Linux kernels, you have to know the GCC compiler to be able to compile with that GCC version?
Many distros still use a version of 2.6.18.xxxx. Some are using kernel 2.6.22 or even 2.6.23 unstable as we speak? Each new kernels has or had more functionality, which you may delete as in Gentoo or T2 compilations instead of GCC versions. Some(ThizLinux v7.0) still use kernel 2.4.20 shamelessly; and making a living selling commercial Linux operating system too. ThizLinux inherited the 18,000+ old applications, vintage RedHat v 7.0?
Applications are different from kernels, utilities, and library of programming tools. Because Linux programming is in modules, you have to use a list and compile the list of a package into a monolithic application(binary codes)?
Please try to suppress your emotions and learn what Linux is all about. Never show your own ignorance in stupid emotions?
Aimless ramblings, never. We are discussing the philosophy of kernel first or applications first? New applications(office) work better with old kernels. Old applications(18,000+) are buggy with new kernels unless backward compatibility is strictly observed in kernel traps. Such philosophical differences are in PcLos and Mandriva, respectively? Have fun?