Ubuntu


I don't see why you'd want it though. Do you really need the GNOME interface? i'm guessing it'd be much more practical to just add a modded pandora GUI to do it instead.
 
Having Ubuntu might mean the Ubuntu library without porting. Plus, I could rsync/sshfs my home directory if I wanted and run my desktop on my Pandora, locally. That'd be nice.

There are advantages. It's just whether you want to go through the work to get to them.
 
javaJake said:
Having Ubuntu might mean the Ubuntu library without porting. Plus, I could rsync/sshfs my home directory if I wanted and run my desktop on my Pandora, locally. That'd be nice.

There are advantages. It's just whether you want to go through the work to get to them.
Without porting? Every package would have to be recompilied for ARM. Ubuntu is for an x86 computer.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pickle said:
javaJake said:
Having Ubuntu might mean the Ubuntu library without porting. Plus, I could rsync/sshfs my home directory if I wanted and run my desktop on my Pandora, locally. That'd be nice.

There are advantages. It's just whether you want to go through the work to get to them.
Without porting? Every package would have to be recompilied for ARM. Ubuntu is for an x86 computer.


Ubuntu has an ARM and an ARMEL flavor. There would be a definite decrease in performance for most programs not tuned for the Pandora. An Ubuntu port in general would grab the attention of a fairly large userbase and also get more publicity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
but otherwise still pointless most of the games probably aren't opengl es 2.0 either

ubuntu mobile requires 256mb ram ... we could use the ubuntu repos and just forget the official ubuntu mobile and we *may* get decent performance but then it wouldn't be ubuntu mobile anymore it would be a custom debian distro IMO
 
Ubuntu 7.04 on OMAP3430

Doesn't seem half bad, and its not even Ubuntu Mobile. The I can think of some limiting factors, such as screen size and resolution. It would still be plausible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kings said:
Ubuntu 7.04 on OMAP3430

Doesn't seem half bad, and its not even Ubuntu Mobile. The I can think of some limiting factors, such as screen size and resolution. It would still be plausible.



It looks like that's running on hardware very similar to the beagleboard (which is similar to the pandora). It would be really useful if we could hook up to a bigger screen, using something like a displaylink connector:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16815290006

Hopefully they'll produce some linux drivers soon. That could be a killer attachment for this device.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pickle said:
Without porting? Every package would have to be recompilied for ARM. Ubuntu is for an x86 computer.
I meant if you got Ubuntu already ready for ARM. :p

And, if BeagleBoard videos say anything, there is such a version available...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
cb88 said:
why run ubuntu if debian lenny is coming out? will be pretty uptodate and way more stable than ubuntu?
That's like saying why does Ubuntu exist. Lenny will only be temporarily more up to date than Ubuntu. Ubuntu is popular and regularly updated. It has a buzz about it. If a Ubuntu flavour were ported to Pandora it would be 'newsworthy' and probably get good publicity. Whether it offers anything as an OS depends on what you want to do and personal preference. But the general public is not going to take much notice of Debian Lenny.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why does ubuntu exist? why couldn't they just contribute packages to debian and make a direct derivative with usability enhancements whouldn't that have served thier goals?

ubuntu is NOT just usability enhancements and it isn't binary compatible with debian... and sadly so IMO prehaps the debian devs are just too uptight or something i don't know but i feel that debian and ubuntu should not be separate... and there are distros built off of debian testing aka (lenny atm) that are very uptodate why ubuntu doesn't do that boggles me

Note: i am using ubuntu atm and i like it (aside the bloatedness which i have tried to lessen to some degree) but i don't agree with their splitting off from debian

am i correct that they take a sid snapshot and apply patches to it untill it becomes ubuntu? as far as i know the fixes that they apply don't make it directly back into debian
 
cb88 said:
Why does ubuntu exist? why couldn't they just contribute packages to debian and make a direct derivative with usability enhancements whouldn't that have served thier goals?

ubuntu is NOT just usability enhancements and it isn't binary compatible with debian... and sadly so IMO prehaps the debian devs are just too uptight or something i don't know but i feel that debian and ubuntu should not be separate... and there are distros built off of debian testing aka (lenny atm) that are very uptodate why ubuntu doesn't do that boggles me

Note: i am using ubuntu atm and i like it (aside the bloatedness which i have tried to lessen to some degree) but i don't agree with their splitting off from debian

am i correct that they take a sid snapshot and apply patches to it untill it becomes ubuntu? as far as i know the fixes that they apply don't make it directly back into debian
I think this extends to the number of linux distos in general, there are way to many, but linux and open source is not what I want but what others want to.

I think of it this way, linux is made to free (as in freedom) in its use. So anyone can do anything with it. Debian as one set of goals and Ubuntu has theirs. I could if it was desire create Pickleix. It probally pretty absurd and be useless to anyone. But I have the choice to do so.
Another way to look at on closed source side you have one choice. Id rather have many choices even if some are pretty useless.

More specific to your questions I believe that debian might be more for the technical user where ubuntu is more for the casual user. Kind of goes back my point on goals. You may be comfortable as a technical linux user but theres probally a lot of casual click and point users that would touch regular debian.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
that is why debian offers tools to remaster it.... while ubuntu just goes off and replaces half the stuff for no reason why couldn't they just make usability fixes for debian

like automatix did for media extensions for debian

ubuntu could have been a gui interface extension meta package and some other defaults tweaks

heh i don't find ubuntu useless... i find it redundant LOL
 
Ubuntu's more user-centric focus allows them to supply packages in their repos that debian wouldn't be able to, due to their own rules (see the DFSG), for example the ubuntu default kernel includes loads of patches for wireless that aren't free enough for debian, but allow an ubuntu machine to hop on to wireless out-of-the-box.

The entire free software community is built upon the ability to fork any project at any time, as long as you abide by the terms of the original license, and since the two projects have completely different goals, having the two combined would bog the entire project down in useless petty bickering about the philosophy behind software.

Personally i use both Ubuntu and Debian. Ubuntu is my desktop OS of choice, because its easy, i dont spend time fighting with my computer, so i can spend more time *using* my computer. I run debian on devices that need a leaner, meaner machine, and don't have the processor cycles to spare for ubuntu's flashiness (like on my eeepc).

So yeah, both have their place, and you have to admit that Ubuntu has done more for desktop linux in the past 4 years than any other distro.
 
Back
Top