SEARCH

Enter your search query in the box above ^, or use the forum search tool.

You are not logged in.

#1 2010-03-13 14:07:03

FiniteStateMachine
Part of the Machine
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: 2009-06-29
Posts: 1,489

Lite Version? (and an idea...)

Are there any plans to have a Lite and Full version of Statler?

I also had a bit of an idea if the case is No.

Would it be possible to have a selection list come up, to select which applications the user would want.
I would imagine this would have to run on the first boot, as otherwise it could get complicated.

I imagine just a screen that is segregated into different groups (web, multimedia, utiltiies, whatever)
Then an icon and name of each possible application.

Only thing that would change would be an additional apt-get and perhaps the use of some config files (if you have specific settings for a program in #!)

I honestly think this would not be hard to implement at all.

What are your thoughts on the matter Corenomial?


just call me...
~FSM~

Offline

Help fund CrunchBang, donate to the project!

#2 2010-03-13 14:15:59

Vuoristoneuvos
Member
Registered: 2010-03-07
Posts: 28

Re: Lite Version? (and an idea...)

It would be more convenient to have that selection in the install phase, rather than on the first boot. At least Arch linux and Ubuntu server have had these options to select/deselect packages and do the install based on that. If implemented, it it could also be used to select between openbox/xfce etc.

Offline

#3 2010-03-13 14:21:38

FiniteStateMachine
Part of the Machine
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: 2009-06-29
Posts: 1,489

Re: Lite Version? (and an idea...)

Yes, it would be more convenient I just don't know if its possible (or possible with little effort should I say).
It doesn't even have to be gui if that is too much work.


just call me...
~FSM~

Offline

#4 2010-03-13 14:30:43

corenominal
WRONG
From: Lincoln, UK
Registered: 2008-11-20
Posts: 5,057
Website

Re: Lite Version? (and an idea...)

blackbinary wrote:

Are there any plans to have a Lite and Full version of Statler?

I also had a bit of an idea if the case is No.

Would it be possible to have a selection list come up, to select which applications the user would want.
I would imagine this would have to run on the first boot, as otherwise it could get complicated.

I imagine just a screen that is segregated into different groups (web, multimedia, utiltiies, whatever)
Then an icon and name of each possible application.

Only thing that would change would be an additional apt-get and perhaps the use of some config files (if you have specific settings for a program in #!)

I honestly think this would not be hard to implement at all.

What are your thoughts on the matter Corenomial?

Unfortunately this is not something which I plan on implementing. The plan is to put out a solid release with fixed set of applications. If you are interested in a more finely tuned custom package selection, I would suggest building your install from a Debian or Ubuntu netinst image. smile

Offline

#5 2010-03-13 14:42:05

snowpine
#!-a-roo
Registered: 2008-11-24
Posts: 2,922

Re: Lite Version? (and an idea...)

I think "base" is a more accurate term than "lite" for "just the bare bones so you can choose your own apps." Debian already provides this with their Minimal CD.

"Lite" implies that different apps have been selected to run on lower-spec hardware. Corenomial briefly flirted with this idea (IIRC one of the 8.10 betas had kazehakase and other liteweight apps) but that exception aside, the Lite version has basically the same hardware requirements as the Full version (other than a gigglebyte or so of hard drive space obviously). It's a Nigel Tufnet "goes to 11" argument... why does an already "liteweight" distro need a separate "lite" version? smile

Last edited by snowpine (2010-03-13 15:03:34)


/hugged

Offline

#6 2010-03-13 14:45:12

FiniteStateMachine
Part of the Machine
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: 2009-06-29
Posts: 1,489

Re: Lite Version? (and an idea...)

I've been getting my feet wet with some scripts in bash, and it seems like i could just run a script after the install to remove the programs I will not use. I personally liked the lite so much because it was faster to download lol

Oh, and corenomial, will there be a application list much like the other versions have had (upon release of course)?

Last edited by FiniteStateMachine (2010-03-13 14:46:06)


just call me...
~FSM~

Offline

#7 2010-03-13 17:12:22

johnraff
#!Drunkard
From: Nagoya, Japan
Registered: 2009-01-07
Posts: 2,927
Website

Re: Lite Version? (and an idea...)

Don't forget the openbox menu, which will have to be hard-coded unless something like marchobmenu is incorporated, so people leaving out apps on install will mean a menu with dead entries.


John
--------------------
( a boring Japan blog , idle twitterings  and GitStuff )
#! forum moderator

Offline

#8 2010-03-13 17:33:58

FiniteStateMachine
Part of the Machine
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: 2009-06-29
Posts: 1,489

Re: Lite Version? (and an idea...)

johnraff wrote:

Don't forget the openbox menu, which will have to be hard-coded unless something like marchobmenu is incorporated, so people leaving out apps on install will mean a menu with dead entries.

I don't see why you can't generate the file on the fly. I have no experience with the menu itself, but if its configs are anything like other menu systems, there is no reason this cannot be done. It would be difficult if there were many many apps to choose from, but in this case I don't think it would be much work. Have in a file, the selections they have chosen, using if statements in your program such that it checks what they have/want installed, and appends the appropriate entry to the file.


just call me...
~FSM~

Offline

#9 2010-03-13 17:36:55

Sergio17771
#! Member
Registered: 2009-06-21
Posts: 88

Re: Lite Version? (and an idea...)

A base install after which you can choose the apps you want to install is the very best ideal way to install an os, but it's very hard to implement. But I think there should be a lite edition of crunchbang with small size that can be downloaded easy from the net. And IMHO
having two image viewers(basically one veiwer and one editor), two video editors, two audio players-editors, is some kind of bloat even if the os is lightweight and responsive wink.........with my best respect to Corenominal big_smile

Offline

#10 2010-03-13 18:07:59

FiniteStateMachine
Part of the Machine
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: 2009-06-29
Posts: 1,489

Re: Lite Version? (and an idea...)

Would it be possible to have a second edition of this release later on? Perhaps, a barebone version could be released, and using scripts could be built up. I'm thinking the way things worked before 9.04, where we had build scripts. I do not know if debian has a 'base' iso like ubuntu's minimal. But if something could be made, then all the crunchiness could be added via community script. That takes any work off Phillip, and we get our own flavours for apps.

I understand you want a solid full release, and I agree that is the best approach for right now. This is really just looking into the future.


just call me...
~FSM~

Offline

#11 2010-03-13 18:18:44

brotherinbluejeans
Member
Registered: 2010-01-28
Posts: 17

Re: Lite Version? (and an idea...)

on this note:
i'm in the process of building an independent package manager/repositroy for window manager / desktop configurations...  it has build into it the capability to give the user an option to install various premade application lists or create their own and upload to the repo..

this could do everything you're talking about blackbinary.
i started this project for use with #! but its actually distro independent (i'm also using it wiht slackware and shouldn't take much more to add rpm compatibility)

just a thought.

Offline

#12 2010-03-13 18:46:32

kmason
#! Member
From: Tempe, AZ, USA
Registered: 2010-02-04
Posts: 54
Website

Re: Lite Version? (and an idea...)

Well, I do know that all the RPM based distros let you choose what apps to install in the installer, and it uses something called Anaconda.  Maybe we can get something similar to that for our installer?


[Acer Aspire One ZG5|Intel Atom N270|1GB RAM|8GB SSD|Intel Integrated Graphics|#! 9.04]
[Custom Desktop|Intel C2D E8400|2GB RAM|80GB & 250GB HDD|NVIDIA GeForce GT220|Win7Pro|#! 9.04]
[last.fm|deviantART|Bloodstar Studios]

Offline

#13 2010-03-13 19:03:47

becker
#! CrunchBanger
From: Perth, Western Australia
Registered: 2010-02-26
Posts: 245
Website

Re: Lite Version? (and an idea...)

I'm not aware if this has already happened with previous builds of Crunchbang but here's my suggestion.

We can sit around here making suggestions until the cows come home, instead why not run a thread/poll where we VOTE for our app of choice For example
browsers
- firefox
- iceweasel
- icecat
- chromium
- opera
- midori
- seamonkey

etc with lists of apps for different categorys editors/file managers/image apps/music apps/etc

then at a certain point which is decided at the outset The results are tallied up and the app from each category with the most votes is the app which gets included into the distro.

You would of course need seperate categorys for text versions vs gui versions vim is an editor as is leafpad but it's fair to have both installed.

How does everyone feel about this suggestion??


pay the bills with Windows, obssesed with Linux, studying CCNA when I can fit it in.

Offline

#14 2010-03-13 20:12:09

omns
#! wanderer
From: ~/
Registered: 2008-11-25
Posts: 5,131

Re: Lite Version? (and an idea...)

becker wrote:

How does everyone feel about this suggestion??

Please discuss this idea in this thread http://crunchbanglinux.org/forums/topic … n-statler/

Offline

#15 2010-03-13 23:49:56

Digit
#! Die Hard
From: the internet
Registered: 2009-05-26
Posts: 1,048
Website

Re: Lite Version? (and an idea...)

johnraff wrote:

Don't forget the openbox menu, which will have to be hard-coded unless something like marchobmenu is incorporated, so people leaving out apps on install will mean a menu with dead entries.

or they could get cunning with the sed in their uninstall-the-apps-i-dont-want script.

i like the idea of including more of the gui config tools.  lxapearance, various menu update options, pipemenus, obkey (oh please include obkey!!), obconf etc etc.

rambling on...
i personally will now most likely spend more time editing the configs manually, cos thats just how i roll now, but the gui tools, not only making openbox feel more padded out in lush cushyness like a full desktop environment, making it more the equal of xfce, but it also just makes it more welcoming to those put off by most lightweight software's starkness on that front.   lxde does well, and that was one of the things that impressed me so much about crunchbang, that it hadnt done it with lxde, it had made a sleek, well integrated feeling, out of the box configuration, and done so by pickin the best components for the task.   the true open-source way i as i had originally envisioned it as a stary eyes noob back in my earlier days with linux.


~ think ~
i have chosen to commit to bedrocklinux.
causes of the mo: remember aaron | stop lennart (& systemd) | without a shot fired

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB

Copyright © 2012 CrunchBang Linux.
Proudly powered by Debian. Hosted by Linode.
Debian is a registered trademark of Software in the Public Interest, Inc.

Debian Logo