| Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject: sidux is not for newbies?
 Posted: Jul 18, 2008 - 02:21 AM
|
|
Joined: Jan 16, 2008
Posts: 90
Status: Offline
|
|
I couldn't even install one package. It's not intuitive.
I think if you have to read hundreds of pages in order to install a package, that means it's not suited for newcomers or inexperienced users. I don't know why sidux decided not to include synaptic which is one of the oldest package managers. I have some experience with apt-get but it wouldn't install anything. I know the manual instructs to install with apt-get and that is fine. I just wanted to search for the package manager, synaptic. I tried to install (using the example in the manual) with apt-get but it couldn't proceed.
I guess that ends my experimenting with sidux. The explanations for partitioning/grub were excellent and I thank the contributors. I appreciated their help. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: sidux is not for newbies?
Posted: Jul 18, 2008 - 02:39 AM
|
|
Joined: Dec 19, 2006
Posts: 1030
Status: Offline
|
|
| Thanks for sharing your opinion and preferences. Synaptic will not be included on this distribution, it is explained why many times before in forums. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: sidux is not for newbies?
Posted: Jul 18, 2008 - 02:42 AM
|
|
Joined: Jan 16, 2008
Posts: 90
Status: Offline
|
|
Okay, I will look it up.
I tried 'apt-get update' and that worked. I was able to 'apt-get install synaptic' after that.
Sorry, I am still learning and there are always slight changes from distro to distro even if it is based on Debian and using KDE. It was frustrating trying to install a package and I have to remember the process (one for sidux is different compared to distro X compared to distro Y and so on). I know there are many similarities but to be honest, I am not used to the apt-get method.
I read this:
http://sidux.com/PNphpBB2-viewtopic-t-5542.html
Sorry to bother anyone with yet another post about graphical package managers. But, keep in mind, I would have been content with just searching/finding a software package (not installing it). I've since found threads discussing how to search and what to use. Anyway, I figured out something basic in the meantime that allowed me to do what I wanted. In the future, if I decide to continue (and try to patiently figure things out), I will post 'how do you do this?' and hopefully, readers won't be too irritated by the question. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: sidux is not for newbies?
Posted: Jul 18, 2008 - 04:36 AM
|
|
Joined: Dec 17, 2007
Posts: 171
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
|
|
| sidux can be for newbies, if they want to learn Debian, GNU and Linux!!! |
_________________
The free(dom) technologies are possible!
Stuff for free(dom) software newbies on work!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: sidux is not for newbies?
Posted: Jul 18, 2008 - 04:40 AM
|
|
Joined: Jul 07, 2007
Posts: 178
Location: Manorville, New York
Status: Offline
|
|
geez tuxracer...I came from Mepis, and used Synaptic as a package manager. Kpackage gave me all the info on packages I needed, even liked it more than Synaptic. The fact that you have to pop up a terminal and use apt-get to do the installs is worth the trouble.
This a great distro. You're using the latest kernels and the most recent versions of programs. Spend some time reading the forums, or chatting in IRC. It feels great to know Linux better. |
_________________
sidux Gaia 64 - ECS 6100SM-M AMD64 AthlonX2
sidux Gaia 32 - Asus P4PE-X P4 Nvidia
sidux Eros 32 - Asus P4PE-X P4 Ati
sidux Gaia 32 - Thinkpad G41
sidux Eros 32 - M2N32SLI-WE AMD64 AthlonX2
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: sidux is not for newbies?
Posted: Jul 18, 2008 - 07:53 AM
|
|
Team Member
Joined: Nov 24, 2006
Posts: 2010
Location: w3
Status: Offline
|
|
All newbies are welcome at sidux, we have a lot of them and they are supported very well in our froums and the IRC. With a minimum of interest and the willingness to look into the manuals from time to time, they usually have no problems at all and enjoy sidux. However, sidux is not designed to fit for newbies who expect everything to work similiar to as it was at distro X or Windows, and who resist to learn alternative methods.
Greetings,
Chris |
_________________
64bit stuff for sidux
development is life - code.zikula.org
an operating system must operate - sidux.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: sidux is not for newbies?
Posted: Jul 18, 2008 - 10:33 AM
|
|
Joined: Dec 04, 2006
Posts: 554
Status: Offline
|
|
Even synaptic does not know anything about packages to install (or dies even work, if the last update ist many weeks ago) if you do not use the "Refresh" - Button.
Is it named that way!? Don't remember.
But this button is the exact counterpart to apt-get update.
Until this is done, neither synaptic not apt know anything about new packages, or have outdated versioning and dependency-information etc.
Apt-get update is just an essential command, that every debian user should know. The fact that some other distros walk the M$-Way by making their users stupid is no reason for sidux doing the same!
Ok, perhaps it would help to emphasize Kpackage more as THE default package-browser in sidux (and alternative to synaptic)
greetings,
me |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: sidux is not for newbies?
Posted: Jul 18, 2008 - 10:53 AM
|
|
Joined: Aug 24, 2007
Posts: 472
Location: Ljubljana
Status: Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 22, 2008 - 11:54 PM
|
|
Joined: Mar 28, 2008
Posts: 145
Location: Olching
Status: Offline
|
|
Hi tuxracer
why should'nt sidux be a distribution for newbies? The only linux I used before was Ubuntu. Just for 2 or 3 weeks and before this I only used different Wins, so I'm the noob par excellence. But sidux really has everything I need, including speeeeeeeeeeeed. It's really pleasing me. But you can only get this
Quote:
... With a minimum of interest and the willingness to look into the manuals from time to time...
or with the words of Desmond Dekker: "...you can get it if you really want ..."
sic est! |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 24, 2008 - 01:04 PM
|
|
Joined: Dec 30, 2007
Posts: 108
Status: Offline
|
|
| I think it's a wonderful distro. Running even the xfce desktop I've been able to get pretty much everything I want to work, the way I want it. There's tons of help on the forum, and the manual is pretty complete too. Check out IRC. I didn't have much linux experience at all when I came here but, with an open mind, I've learned a lot. (THANK YOU EVERYONE) You usually get out of life what you put into it. sidux is no different. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 24, 2008 - 06:04 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 16, 2008
Posts: 90
Status: Offline
|
|
Okay, okay. I went to the IRC site and the people there were really REALLY helpful. I really appreciated their help. I was able to install what I wanted/needed and now everything is great. I would like to install the proprietary Nvidia driver soon. They went to a lot of trouble, it seems, to have everything run smooth and that is something I like a lot. I don't know if it's acceptable to ask for Firefox 3 but I wouldn't mind comparing to Iceweasel.
I can't say enough how much I like the IRC option, though. It's nice to have support in real time. I think they should be commended big time for that. I hope they realize there are newbies who appreciate their time.
I was just getting frustrated with some things (not working) since it is often difficult for me since it seems I don't grasp (Linux) stuff as quickly as I think I should. Not to mention, I think my memory decides to stop working at the worst possible times.  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 24, 2008 - 07:58 PM
|
|
Team Member
Joined: Nov 27, 2006
Posts: 1962
Location: underworld
Status: Offline
|
|
iceweasel = firefox
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naming_con ... nd_Mozilla
Subject: Re: Bug#354622: Using Firefox as the app name without official branding is still a trademark violation
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 16:16:59 -0700
The firefox logos are distributed under a non-free
copyright license
> >>Why can't you just use the official branding switch, anyway?
> >Because it uses graphics which have a non-free copyright license.
> This is not something where you are free to pick what parts you want to
> use. Either use the trademarked logos and name together or don't. The
> name is trademarked in the exact same way as the logo, so I fail to see
> how you can argue that one is acceptable to use and the other is not.
> Maybe there's a technicality, but the name is just as free as the logos...
The distinction here is that the firefox name is just a name, covered only
by trademark law (not by copyright law), but a logo is a work of art,
covered both by copyright law and trademark law. Applying trademark-*like*
restrictions on a work of art in its copyright license prevents our users
from doing things with that work that they are allowed to do with other free
artwork, *and* which are permitted under trademark law. For instance, a
trademark is limited to a field of endeavour, so using the logo in an
unrelated field is permitted by trademark law but not permitted by the
copyright license; or, a logo may be used as a starting point for another
work of art which is a derivative *work* under copyright law, but is not a
derivative *mark* under trademark law. |
_________________
.... _
... (0)>
... / / \
.. / / . )
.. V_/_sidux powered
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
