Re: oh no something is definitly wrong adieu debian.
On 8/27/13, Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-08-27 at 18:07 +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>> For server, perhaps simpler XFCE4?
>
> Xfce or LXDE are a good idea.
>
>> Or add custom repo and install Cinnamon or MATE desktops
>
> Have you ever tested Cinnamon and MATE?
No. Wanted to.
> Nobody should consider that one
> of them can be called a quasi continued GNOME2,
Ralph, surely you "should" know better!
Goodness me, you *should* think before you type.
Nobody should consider that such simple replies can be called
reasonable continuation of my comment.
> or that they are usable
> for a stable production environment. I'm a Xfce user and installed both
> for testing purpose.
Your feedback regarding your testing of stability of Cinnamon, and
MATE, may be useful.
>> I went to Ubuntu first in 6.04, then 8.04, then never happy to upgrade
>> from there, so came back to Debian recently (last year), because of
>> Unity interface I don't like.
>
> There are Ubuntu teams such as the Xubuntu team.
I am aware.
Ralph, are you suggesting to me that Xubuntu is better than Debian+XFCE ?
> Xfce users better go
> with Xubuntu or Ubuntu Studio.
Arch linux users who promote Ubuntu *over* Debian better go to another list!
I am XFCE user. I better stay with Debian.
Your comment is meaningless.
Perhaps you should add some other sentence for others to make sense of
what you say?
At the moment, your direct response to my comment is strange, to say the least!
Ralph, are you a compulsive relationship communications boundary tester?
>> So now I use XFCE4. There are some dissatisfactory things these days.
>> Gnome2 just worked - and I could customize it in just the way I
>> wanted. But XFCE with some scripts and things here and there, and it's
>> acceptable. This is primary workstation.
>
> I agree and Xfce4 is much closer to GNOME2 than Cinnamon and Mate are.
Ok.
>> I agree - it would be _very_ miserable day to have to leave Debian.
>> When I came back last year, it was like coming home to parents for
>> Christmas after many years away... too many years away..
>
> In my experiences versatility is the best thing, IOW don't consider a
> distro to be your golden calve, use the distro that fit best to your
> needs. Once you're used too different package managements etc. it's easy
> to switch the distro whenever needed. I always have different distros
> installed. At the moment Arch Linux fit best to my needs and can be most
> easiest configured to my needs. If this should change I even don't need
> to install another Linux, they're already installed and at least two
> different distros are maintained on my machine.
My need is time. I had multiple Ubuntu and Debian installs for a while
last year, but management and maintaining common customizations was
too much overhead. I've also tried CentOS and Slackware. In my opinion
best thing is Debian stable and Debian unstable installs, depending on
need. This minimizes the time I spend learning minutiae between
distros - real waste of time. Greater efficiency in one OS (at least,
for Debian) = greater productivity of my time. This is best.
:)
Zenaan
Reply to: