Linux Mint 6 "Felicia" released!

[Pierre]

Its a case of Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ..

I wiped sda2 & re-installed with the existing sda5 as /home.
Kept all my setting / files BUT - it thinks that its Elyssa in the start menu.
probably should have Uninstalled Wine & its programs ( & wine doors)., as that is all messed up.
The new Mintinstall took over a hour to initialise. - run ok now though.

P.

[dizmoduck]

After try RedHat Fedora for 2-3 years on my server a swift over to Debian, but I still used Windows XP on my WS, but eventually I hat to get over til Linux on that to, I try out Ubuntu but it was not able to be install on my self assemble WS, after some more search i came by Mint and Mint 5 had no problem with my WS.

Now I'm waiting for the x64 version of Mint 6 and I also going try it on my mom's WS (she is over 67 and not a geek)

I'll try a update first but will do a fresh install after that, because i have some unsolved problem with my nVidia 8500GT.

thank for the good work

PS: when can we expect the x64 version or were can I get a RC iso?

[Bagheera]

The file transfer with bluetooth doesn't work; i know for many people on different machines: obex protocol error!

Said that, i can see hd apple trailers out of the box!!!! GREAT

[memomelaque]

I have the same experience as Detrix, no text in Open Office nor in Wine nor in anything I try to run in Wine.

"Postby Detrix on Wed Dec 17, 2008 11:07 am
Thanks for a great job .
But there is some things i must say...
In some progs, like openoffice and wine for example is the text missing.
maybe an update is comming to correct this.
Worked fine in LM 5.

Keep up the good work."

[marcus0263]

Mint looks great, but I have to admit I'm a bit dissatisfied that I have to wait for a x64 edition of Felicia.

But for now I'll have to join the group waiting for x86.

Btw. could there really be more users using x86 than x64? I know there's still a lot x86 users, but if there is way more users using x64 I'm of the belief that an x64 edition should have an higher priority. Or am I totally off the track on that point?

Nope, I'm in agreement with you. Due to the reality being that 32 Bit processors haven't been mainstream for sometime now. I've been running a 64 Bit Desktop for a couple of years now and find it to much more stable than 32 Bit. I only recently left Gentoo as my Desktop for Mint because of Elyssa 64 Bit.

64 should be of either higher or at the very least the same priority level as 32, 32 Bit needs to be retired to its place, legacy support.

My two bits for what it's worth.

[phonic-at-work]

priority number 1 was Clem movnig house

[marcus0263]

priority number 1 was Clem movnig house

No argument there

Now he just needs to get a broad band connection

[Penguinosity]

I'm fairly new to Linux, but I have been using Mint since I first discovered Darnya.
Then, a prettier and even more charming Elyssa came along.

I guess I am just fickle because Felicia has taken my breath away.

Thanks to Clem and his team for all their hard work.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

[McLovin]

3d effects are not working after instalation of restricted drivers.
I do not want to dig in xorg.conf.

Last version (5) and 6RC1 worked with that.

you need to tell ppl a little more info, and post this in the help section if you want some help, im sure there is something that can be done, but without some input from you, there is nothing anyone can do to help you.

[AK Dave]

My laptops support 64bit, but I prefer a 32bit linux install because despite the fact that the CPU is "64bit" and theoretically everything in the machine supports 64bit, the vast majority of my quirky problems solved themselves magically by switching to 32bit OS. Or in other words "reverting back", as the laptop was originally sold with XP. Oh sure, it was "Vista Ready", but it was "32bit Vista Ready" despite being a 64bit computer. It is only a couple years old and runs fine, and computers like mine are far more the rule than the exception today.

Maybe the 64bit stuff works great on something brand new. I wouldn't know.

I certainly don't consider operating a 2 year old laptop with an AMD dual core to be "legacy support". I rather resent and take personal the suggestion that 32bit support is "legacy support".

You know, if you really want a 64bit OS on that fancy new machine why don't you just keep the Vista it came with? Oh, because it doesn't work? Sure. So don't try to stuff it down my throat either.

If, due to limited hours in the day, we have to have "one then the other" instead of "both simultaneously" then please keep 32bit first.

[marcus0263]

My laptops support 64bit, but I prefer a 32bit linux install because despite the fact that the CPU is "64bit" and theoretically everything in the machine supports 64bit, the vast majority of my quirky problems solved themselves magically by switching to 32bit OS. Or in other words "reverting back", as the laptop was originally sold with XP. Oh sure, it was "Vista Ready", but it was "32bit Vista Ready" despite being a 64bit computer. It is only a couple years old and runs fine, and computers like mine are far more the rule than the exception today.

Maybe the 64bit stuff works great on something brand new. I wouldn't know.

I certainly don't consider operating a 2 year old laptop with an AMD dual core to be "legacy support". I rather resent and take personal the suggestion that 32bit support is "legacy support".

You know, if you really want a 64bit OS on that fancy new machine why don't you just keep the Vista it came with? Oh, because it doesn't work? Sure. So don't try to stuff it down my throat either.

If, due to limited hours in the day, we have to have "one then the other" instead of "both simultaneously" then please keep 32bit first.

Take it personal? That's just the facts, 32 Bit IS legacy, try buying a 32 Bit machine the last two - three years.

Since your processor on your two year old Laptop being 64 Bit rather proves 32 Bit is Legacy wouldn't you say?

BTW my main rig at home is 2005 vintage and I've been running 64 Bit for going on 3 years now with zero problems. In my experience 64 Bit is more stable than 32 Bit.

[AK Dave]

Take it personal? That's just the facts, 32 Bit IS legacy, try buying a 32 Bit machine the last two - three years.

]

While it is true that a new computer, or one purchased within the last 2-3 years, will almost certainly have a 64bit, it is disingenuous to say that every such computer is "64bit". In name only, as a technicality, perhaps, but the MAJORITY of these consumer-grade electronics devices are designed for and intended to be used with 32bit-only software. Full function with these computers using 64bit software is more problematic, in case you never noticed. You conveniently ignore this reality and this point which I made previously.

Those computers are the majority. They are certainly not "legacy", despite whatever hardware YOU may be so fortunate to use.

BTW my main rig at home is 2005 vintage and I've been running 64 Bit for going on 3 years now with zero problems. In my experience 64 Bit is more stable than 32 Bit.

Hooray for you. I am so thrilled for you.

[marcus0263]

While it is true that a new computer, or one purchased within the last 2-3 years, will almost certainly have a 64bit, it is disingenuous to say that every such computer is "64bit". In name only, as a technicality, perhaps, but the MAJORITY of these consumer-grade electronics devices are designed for and intended to be used with 32bit-only software. Full function with these computers using 64bit software is more problematic, in case you never noticed. You conveniently ignore this reality and this point which I made previously.

64 Bit processor pretty much makes it 64 Bit doesn't it? Just because it can "emulate" a 32 Bit environment doesn't make it a 32 Bit machine no matter how you try to spin it
Like I've said I've used a 64 Bit Desktop for going on 3 years now, no problems here. Well that is for Linux anyway, Microsoft is another story but this isn't a Microsoft Windows forum is it?

Those computers are the majority. They are certainly not "legacy", despite whatever hardware YOU may be so fortunate to use.

Now who's the one being "disingenuous" by calling a 64 Bit system 32 Bit?
Like I said, try buying a 32 Bit system for the last 3 years or so.
When you can no longer buy the hardware for the last 3 years kinda makes it legacy wouldn't you say?

Hooray for you. I am so thrilled for you.

I'm glad and maybe you can try using your laptop in it's native environment

[lakehousetech]

For people with more than 4 gigs of ram you have to use 64, unless you install a server kernel which botched my wifi

Actually you can use the big mem kernel (non-server) to utilize more than 4GB of RAM.

[lakehousetech]

AK Dave> I'm sorry you take this as a personal offense, but I agree with marcus0263 that no matter how you try to twist it 32bit won't become less legacy. 32bit systems is legacy, the 64bit systems is improving all the time.

A lot of the issues in the start with 64bit is either solved or on the way to be solved. I think a better option for you rather than being insulted would be to give 64bit a chance again, and see if the problems you have experienced is solved. If not then live with the fact that you use a system that works as a legacy system. My workstation is a Pentium 4 and on that I live with the fact that it's a legacy system. I know it, but I don't complain.

Both of you have no clue what your talking about. Quit trolling around on the release thread.

[humptydumpty]

Well done - yet another excellent Mint distro! A very nice gift for Christmas!

Thanks Clem et al.

Mike.

[AK Dave]

64 Bit processor pretty much makes it 64 Bit doesn't it?

No. Once again, just because the CPU is 64bit doesn't mean that everything in the laptop was intended to be used with a 64bit OS. Especially if the laptop shipped with a 32bit Windows XP and the manufacturer's Vista support for that machine is limited to 32bit.

64bit has just been too quirky for me.

Like I've said I've used a 64 Bit Desktop for going on 3 years now, no problems here.

I am sooo thrilled for you! Hooray!

I'm glad and maybe you can try using your laptop in it's native environment

Been there. Done that. No thank you.

[AK Dave]

I think a better option for you rather than being insulted would be to give 64bit a chance again, and see if the problems you have experienced is solved.

Believe me, I do it every couple of months. New Ubuntu comes out, I try it in 64bit first. Really makes me appreciate Mint. This exact issue is why my main rig, a laptop, has 3 bootable linux partitions on it and usable at any one time. Usually also 2 bootable persistent USB sticks.

I have the least issues (zero) and the greatest stability with 32bit Mint.

When 64bit Felicia comes out, I'll put it in place of a 64bit Xubuntu/Ubuntu dual-DE install AND see if ndiswrapper or my video drivers work any better in a 64bit environment than they did the last time. Last time I went 64bit, I lost suspend/resume, wifi stability was dicey, and OOO3 was a buggy.

But when I'm perfectly happy with a solid, stable, and 100% functioning 32bit Felicia there is very little (zero) incentive for me to do this except for the gee-whiz factor of being able to say that my kernel is 64bit. Nope. If that means legacy, then thats the vast majority of desktop linux installs. I'm in good company.

[Handyman]

Anyone know how to lock your screen in Mint 6? I miss this.

[marcus0263]

64 Bit processor pretty much makes it 64 Bit doesn't it?

No. Once again, just because the CPU is 64bit doesn't mean that everything in the laptop was intended to be used with a 64bit OS. Especially if the laptop shipped with a 32bit Windows XP and the manufacturer's Vista support for that machine is limited to 32bit.

64bit has just been too quirky for me.

Like I've said I've used a 64 Bit Desktop for going on 3 years now, no problems here.

I am sooo thrilled for you! Hooray!

I'm glad and maybe you can try using your laptop in it's native environment

Been there. Done that. No thank you.

What ever Dude