crunchdebian?

ggarron · 2009-02-10 03:00:03

Hi,

Do you think this may work to make a Crunchbang version based on Debian?

http://www.go2linux.org/forums/aptoncd- … m-t-3.html

I know I will have some packages that will not be found, but is there a better aproach to start with?

regards,
Guillermo.

rizzo · 2009-02-10 03:15:21

There are several barriers to overcome. The most time consuming would be having to rebuild the crunchbang specific debs that exist within the crunchbang repos. You'd also have to decide which debian you are going to use as a base - stable, testing etc. Maybe sidux as a base may be an option.

ggarron · 2009-02-10 03:23:40

I would like to use Testing, as Ubuntu is already based on Unstable (Sid).
I am on a Debian right now, and will be at my #! tomorrow, but if can remember well, there was no #! repository, and all my sources.list was Ubuntu's.
Am I wrong?
regards.

snowpine · 2009-02-10 03:26:12

I'm running sidux lxde on an old laptop that formerly ran #!... it is very nice. smile

Openbox is so easy to theme and customize--I think a crunch-look.deb package would be a great first step towards #! debian.

snowpine · 2009-02-10 03:29:56

Hi ggaron,
Here's the relevant section from my sources.list:

## CrunchBang Linux 8.10.xx
## Compatible with Ubuntu 8.10 "Intrepid Ibex"
deb http://crunchbang.net/packages-8.10.xx 8.10.xx main

Hope that helps. smile

ggarron · 2009-02-10 03:35:40

@snowpine

Thanks! that really helps!!

Sjur · 2009-02-10 04:52:45

was planning to check this out when I get back to a stable ethernet-connection.

I think that just to get the looks of it, you need the config files and themes. Since #! mostly uses lxde to make the computer tick, it should be almost sufficiant to install lxde and clone your configs... though I'm not all sure about that (need to test it myself first). If t goes well, I'll post the results in the forums...

if you see here it's not that much containing inside the #! repo, mostly themes which you can install yourself in other ways.

was planing to make a even lighter and faster crunheee for my own use (drop gdm for xdm). the big problem is the array-kernel which I probably have to compile myself for debian. And that means I have to learn something:/

also the eee-debian guys have some nice tricks to make it boot faster and maybe drag some moblin-stuff in there as well... We'll se how it turns out... but it's over 2 weeks until I can start messing around with this, and I'm getting kinda restless to start.

ggarron · 2009-02-10 10:39:32

The Debian I use at my laptop even had no xdm or gdm, so I use Fluxbox with startx.
But, when I installed LXDE, it came with gdm smile .

This is my basic setup
http://www.go2linux.org/installing-a-li … an-fluxbox

ggarron · 2009-02-10 11:51:18

snowpine wrote:

Hi ggaron,
Here's the relevant section from my sources.list:
## CrunchBang Linux 8.10.xx
## Compatible with Ubuntu 8.10 "Intrepid Ibex"
deb http://crunchbang.net/packages-8.10.xx 8.10.xx main

This is weird, I have just arrived to my job, where I use CB, and listed my sources.list, and there is no crunchbang line in there, not even in the commented section, should I manually add it?

rizzo · 2009-02-10 12:00:48

You'll find it in /etc/apt/sources.list.d/crunchbang.list

ggarron · 2009-02-10 12:03:05

omns wrote:

You'll find it in /etc/apt/sources.list.d/crunchbang.list

Oops! smile
Thanks, I feel like a fool.

regards,
Guillermo.

snowpine · 2009-02-10 12:52:35

Sjur wrote:

the big problem is the array-kernel which I probably have to compile myself for debian. And that means I have to learn something:/

Completely unnecessary to port the array.org kernel to Debian, as Lenny has excellent support for the eee out-of-the-box: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEeePC/HowTo/Install

Sjur · 2009-02-10 16:37:01

yup, I know... but I'm still thinking of porting... I'll learn something new, and I can make a leaner kernel made for my use... though it's a big step to try, I'll think I'll see what I can do...

wmdiem · 2009-02-19 16:00:50

+1 on the sidux idea. I've been using it and I'm really impressed.
I think starting from sidux, running the smxi script to get the non-free stuff, then installing openbox, conkey, lxpanel, etc, copying your #! config files over, and adding any other highend aps you need (e.g., claws, gimp, etc) from the sidux/sid repos would probably give a pretty close experience.
You could even make a script to do it in case someone else want to imitate it.

snowpine · 2009-02-19 16:12:07

Another great thing about sidux is that it's rolling release... you never have to worry about upgrading from 8.04 to 8.10 like you do with Ubuntu. In fact, every upgrade in sidux is a dist-upgrade (apt-get upgrade is not supported). I realized I forgot to put the link for sidux lxde in my previous post (it is not an official part of the sidux project): http://www.cap.gediam.de/index-en.htm Basically the only reason I used lxde sid (as opposed to the official release) was to get sidux without Xfce or KDE (sidux does not have a minimal install option, which might be a stumbling block to building crunch-sid-bang-ux).

wmdiem · 2009-02-19 16:56:57

why is it a stumbling block? Can't you just install openbox, then uninstall xfce?

snowpine · 2009-02-19 17:09:34

Of course, I just think it is... inelegant... to install something with the intention of immediately uninstalling it; therefore I typically start with a minimal install whenever possible. smile

But what I actually meant is that, it would be a stumbling block for Corenomial if he ever theoretically decided to port #! to sidux, since #! is built from a minimal Ubuntu install and there is no comparable sidux minimal install.

Last edited by snowpine (2009-02-19 17:11:20)

flicck · 2009-02-24 03:34:00

Doing a minimal Debian netinstall is so simple, I don't see why anyone would bother with sidux. I just looked over the crunchbang applications list in an elinks vterm and aptitude installed what I wanted, ignored the rest. Installing the nvidia driver the Debian way was easy, too. Not as easy as using jockey or envyng, but all of about five minutes and a few well-documented command line bits. For anyone really interested in building a system from nothing, I can't recommend Debian netinst enough.

qmemo · 2009-02-24 05:01:41

flicck, just wanted to ask what do you really GET with debian that you do not GET with ubuntu?

You can choose not answer that actually

snowpine · 2009-02-24 13:00:24

qmemo wrote:

flicck, just wanted to ask what do you really GET with debian that you do not GET with ubuntu?

Hi Gmemo, I won't claim to answer for flicck smile but here are my thoughts: The coolest thing about Debian testing and unstable is that they are "rolling release." You keep your system constantly up to date, rather than a big dist-upgrade every 6 months like with Ubuntu. Frankly the 6 month cycle is getting annoying; here we are awaiting #! 8.10.3 when Jaunty comes out in 2 months...

qmemo wrote:

Doing a minimal Debian netinstall is so simple, I don't see why anyone would bother with sidux.

Flicck, I agree that Debian netinstall is awesome, and I have done it a couple of times. To answer your question, there are a few differences between sid and sidux, but the biggest is, sidux has its own kernels. For example, Debian sid was frozen at 2.6.27 for quite some time, while sidux users were enjoying 2.6.28-sidux. I haven't used sidux long enough to really have a strong opinion, but I've heard claims that sidux is more stable than sid. It is also more of a "stand alone distro" with a live CD and easy installers for hard drive or usb.

anonymous · 2009-02-24 16:52:24

So is Debian testing/unstable similar to Arch Linux, or does Arch still have newer packages?

snowpine · 2009-02-24 17:04:48

anonymous wrote:

So is Debian testing/unstable similar to Arch Linux, or does Arch still have newer packages?

Arch is ahead of Debian Sid (unstable) right now, because Sid was "frozen" while they were prepping Lenny for stable release. Now that Lenny is out, Sid is updating rapidly on a daily basis. There is also Debian "experimental," which is even newer than Sid, but most people don't actually use that as a full distro. Rather, you would use the experimental repo for a specific package (let's say you needed the latest version of something, but it hasn't made it to Sid yet, you can pull it in from experimental at your own risk).

As to whether or not Arch and Debian are "similar" in the big picture--there are a lot of differences, the biggest being that Debian uses apt-get (or aptitude) and Arch uses pacman. Debian would be much more familiar than Arch to the average Crunchbang user.

anonymous · 2009-02-24 21:13:39

I just wanted to compare which has newer packages, thanks.

CrunchBang Linux

SEARCH

#1 2009-02-10 03:00:03

crunchdebian?

#2 2009-02-10 03:15:21

Re: crunchdebian?

#3 2009-02-10 03:23:40

Re: crunchdebian?

#4 2009-02-10 03:26:12

Re: crunchdebian?

#5 2009-02-10 03:29:56

Re: crunchdebian?

#6 2009-02-10 03:35:40

Re: crunchdebian?

#7 2009-02-10 04:52:45

Re: crunchdebian?

#8 2009-02-10 10:39:32

Re: crunchdebian?

#9 2009-02-10 11:51:18

Re: crunchdebian?

#10 2009-02-10 12:00:48

Re: crunchdebian?

#11 2009-02-10 12:03:05

Re: crunchdebian?

#12 2009-02-10 12:52:35

Re: crunchdebian?

#13 2009-02-10 16:37:01

Re: crunchdebian?

#14 2009-02-19 16:00:50

Re: crunchdebian?

#15 2009-02-19 16:12:07

Re: crunchdebian?

#16 2009-02-19 16:56:57

Re: crunchdebian?

#17 2009-02-19 17:09:34

Re: crunchdebian?

#18 2009-02-24 03:34:00

Re: crunchdebian?

#19 2009-02-24 05:01:41

Re: crunchdebian?

#20 2009-02-24 13:00:24

Re: crunchdebian?

#21 2009-02-24 16:52:24

Re: crunchdebian?

#22 2009-02-24 17:04:48

Re: crunchdebian?

#23 2009-02-24 21:13:39

Re: crunchdebian?

Board footer