New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

PCLinucOS Delayed

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 
Well, for those of you waiting for the final release of Pclinuxos 2007 will have to wait another 6 months.

PCLinuxOS becomes PCUbuntuOS

Submitted by srlinuxx on Sun, 04/01/2007 - 07:29.
pclos

Interviews


PCLinuxOS founder Texstar said in a private interview that they would using Ubuntu for the base of future versions of PCLinuxOS. Citing the old adage 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em,' Texstar states that PCLinuxOS 2007 will be delayed for another six months or so while the new change is implemented.
When asked why they would make such a drastic change Texstar said, "If Ubuntu is going to take over the Linux world, then perhaps we should be on the winning team."
Texstar also said that the upcoming default interface would indeed be gnome. He added, "All indications point to a confused user when faced with too many choices and Gnome has the built-in advantage of limited user configuration and customization."
What of all your software in the PCLOS repository, I asked. Texstar answered, "Again, it seems that the new influx of Linux users just does not want too much freedom of choice. This makes things easier for the developer in that I will not need to recompile all those packages for our new PCUbuntuOS. It seems clear that most users are happy having one app chosen for them for each task and we should be able to fit most onto a standard cdrom sized iso. We see no further need of an online repository of thousands of extra applications compiled especially for our distro anymore."
Texstar explains their position on sudo by saying, "Sudo is a very important element of the Ubuntu experience. It offers numerous capabilities while advocating very little concern over restrictive security issues. Sudo makes sure anyone can execute any command desired without having administration privileges. It removes all the unnecessary permission confusion for the new Linux user."
Not quite all the developers on the PCLOS team will be staying on during and after the conversion. Sal is quoted as saying, "This is bullsh*t! If I wanted to work on Ubuntu, I would have joined their development team long ago and got paid for it." OClient is quoted as saying, "I'm taking the sources to the current PCLOS and forking it to my own distro. I'll be calling it PCRealLinuxOS."
When asked how he felt about the dissention in the ranks, Tex said, "Well, it was to be expected. Humans naturally resist change, however good for them it may be. Most of us are excited about the change and all the extra free time it will give us."
In closing, Texstar stated to look for a test of PCUbuntuOS to be posted sometime in the near future.

http://www.tuxmachines.org/node/14885
post #2 of 14
better be a sick april fools joke.

seriously though....i am with Sal in my opinion. we already have Simply Mepis becoming Simply Ubuntu, and Freespire becoming Freebuntu...now this . I mean i know that historically PCLOS was based on Mandrake, but for 2007 release Tex wanted to start the separation... the change to ubuntu is huge...kde-->gnome, rpm ->deb, i586 --> i386....this is trully all kinds of bull. if i wanted another slow distro that took a minute to boot and 20 seconds to open firefox, i'd be using ubuntu.
post #3 of 14
Thread Starter 
LOL, i was specifically targeting you abf, yes it is indeed a "sick april fools joke"

just wanted to see your reaction
post #4 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by abf
the change to ubuntu is huge...kde-->gnome, rpm ->deb, i586 --> i386....this is trully all kinds of bull. if i wanted another slow distro that took a minute to boot and 20 seconds to open firefox, i'd be using ubuntu.
First of all this is obviously a april fools joke. Second, I don't get the statement that Ubuntu is slow. First of all, and correct me if I'm wrong, but there's no i386 kernel anymore. It's just the generic kernel, which performs pretty well in my experience, but I usually use the amd64 build. I think just about all of the other kernels have been depreciated since Dapper.

Now if you're only considering boot times then you may have a case, but booting Feisty on my laptop (which is a dev machine) only takes 30 seconds. That seems pretty reasonable since I have a zillion services starting.

I've never seen problems with applications starting slowly, either. On my Dapper install some apps started a few seconds slower than I would have liked, but Edgy and Feisty have been pretty fast.
post #5 of 14
granted that Edgy is a step up in speed from Dapper, but its a step down (an off-the-cliff fall?) in terms of stability....no good. I haven't had a new ubuntu install since the first few weeks of the Edgy cycle...and the install of ubuntu on my desktop started out as dapper 6.06....and now is some mutant clone of edgy and dapper. so i am not exactly sure on new kernel configs or what not....sure i'll give fiesty a shot when it launches, i hope you're right about speed improvements. in the mean time i'll be rocking the PCLOS2007 (now even faster that i am rockin' the fluxbox instead of KDE)
post #6 of 14
Thread Starter 
mind posting that fluxbox setup of yours abf?
post #7 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIGEE1212
PCLinuxOS becomes PCUbuntuOS

Submitted by srlinuxx on Sun, 04/01/2007 - 07:29.

post #8 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by abf
granted that Edgy is a step up in speed from Dapper, but its a step down (an off-the-cliff fall?) in terms of stability....no good. I haven't had a new ubuntu install since the first few weeks of the Edgy cycle...and the install of ubuntu on my desktop started out as dapper 6.06....and now is some mutant clone of edgy and dapper. so i am not exactly sure on new kernel configs or what not....

Could I suggest trying out a clean install from the Kubuntu 7.04 beta, if you have the space to do that as well as your regular install?
It seems that speed and stability would be better evaluated with a fresh install. In particular it sounds as earlier kernel choices mean you are using a deprecated, i386 kernel module.
post #9 of 14
Thread Starter 
Edgy is slow. I use it as my main distro (either ubuntu or linux mint). I love ubuntu becuase everything works without too much tweaking and every problem i have had has been solved either here or at the ubuntu forums. If you compare it to pretty much any other distro (except for the bloated ones) there is a huge speed difference.

And if you compare it to the distros that are meant for speed, ubuntu just looks even worse.

I think it's slow becuase it originally had the i386 kernel, even though it was replaced by the generic image, it still has to support those older machines.
post #10 of 14
I don't think edgy ever used the i386 kernel. I've only seen the generic and there's no reason to use anything but the generic (unless you compile one yourself).

Chris is right... you can't expect good things from a frankinstall. I do think that, with feisty, and the restricted driver manager and some proprietary libraries, doing a dist-upgrade is much more reliable. I've done two (Edgy to Feisty) that went perfectly.

Another thing I've noticed is that many systems benefit HUGELY from some minor tweaks. Like changing cache values, disabling IPV6, enabling prelinking, etc. I really don't think the kernel plays a significant factor in the performance of modern computers. I stopped using gentoo when I couldn't notice a difference in performance with ubuntu.
post #11 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigtrouble77
Another thing I've noticed is that many systems benefit HUGELY from some minor tweaks. Like changing cache values, disabling IPV6, enabling prelinking, etc. I really don't think the kernel plays a significant factor in the performance of modern computers. I stopped using gentoo when I couldn't notice a difference in performance with ubuntu.

I'd be interested in pointers to those tweaks.
post #12 of 14
Thread Starter 
same here.
post #13 of 14
Here's some that I used:
http://xlntsolution.blogspot.com/200...butterfly.html

Understand this is for Feisty. I know some things here are not applicable to Edgy. Things like disabling IPV6 are debatable whether or not it does anything. From what I've seen, systems experiencing problems connecting to sites may see a big improvement. If things seem to be fine then it will offer no improvement.

Read the comments below (from the link above) to see some of the discussion about these tweaks and what they are actually doing. I've personally changed my swappiness value to 10 (I have 2gb of memory so I can afford to), installed preload, aliased hostname (only applies to feisty and I had done this for other purposes a while ago), and did the parallel boot process.

Booting for me takes about 30 seconds and open office starts in about 4 (uncached). In general, my machine is very responsive. Opera has been my only problem. It can get sluggish and uses an inordinate amount of memory (and I've turned off all history).
post #14 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigtrouble77
Here's some that I used:
http://xlntsolution.blogspot.com/200...butterfly.html

Understand this is for Feisty. I know some things here are not applicable to Edgy. Things like disabling IPV6 are debatable whether or not it does anything. From what I've seen, systems experiencing problems connecting to sites may see a big improvement. If things seem to be fine then it will offer no improvement.

Thanks for the pointer! I had googled on ipv6 linux disable and disabled mine, did not see any difference.

From the list above I have also now enabled the parallel boot and the swappiness of 10. (I have 2G ram, a 2G swap file and the swap seems to be unused).

I may try the preload too. I won't disable pango, since I need it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigtrouble77
Read the comments below (from the link above) to see some of the discussion about these tweaks and what they are actually doing. I've personally changed my swappiness value to 10 (I have 2gb of memory so I can afford to), installed preload, aliased hostname (only applies to feisty and I had done this for other purposes a while ago), and did the parallel boot process.

Booting for me takes about 30 seconds and open office starts in about 4 (uncached). In general, my machine is very responsive. Opera has been my only problem. It can get sluggish and uses an inordinate amount of memory (and I've turned off all history).

I haven't timed boot, but launching an uncached Opera (9.10) or Firefox (3.0a3) takes 3 to 4 seconds. I will time a boot.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Linux & Other OS's