Porting Linux Mint tools to Arch (formerly Mint Arch Edit.)

[shane]

I have to agree with FedoraRefugee... most people who are attracted to Arch are because of the DIY nature of Arch. I use Arch for systems that I want to customize to the last detail and I use Mint when I need to get a system up and running ASAP. However, I would like to see what you can do with it. I, myself, first installed with the Chakra Project... but once you learn what Arch is all about, you will see that it is better to just DIY IMO.

Shameless plug My first contribution to Arch: Pacleanup - http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=91452
And if you like Fluxbox, the current stable Mint Fluxbox menu is in AUR - http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=35651

[Craig_Dem]

Just installed your PKGBUILDS. No bugs and it runs just like on Linux mint. Excellent work.

[Sloshy]

I have to agree with FedoraRefugee... most people who are attracted to Arch are because of the DIY nature of Arch. I use Arch for systems that I want to customize to the last detail and I use Mint when I need to get a system up and running ASAP. However, I would like to see what you can do with it. I, myself, first installed with the Chakra Project... but once you learn what Arch is all about, you will see that it is better to just DIY IMO.

I agree. I'm most attracted to work on this project because lots of people like rolling release systems and a distribution that didn't take a day and a half to set up (from my experience with Arch) and had the latest packages is something that a lot of people would like. I'm thinking this could be more of a simple install/setup script that would run on top of a regular Arch setup (I'll most likely make liveCDs anyways, but the script is what I'm aiming for).

[Sloshy]

Just installed your PKGBUILDS. No bugs and it runs just like on Linux mint. Excellent work.

Thank you very much ! Sorry for not posting some more, I'm a little busy with school and Mint 9's being released soon. I want to base this on that.

[Sloshy]

Alright, I just updated mintDesktop to 3.2.0. I just had to change the arch patch file so the about window will display correctly again. Does anyone know the changelog for this version?

[Craig_Dem]

mintdesktop (3.2.0) isadora; urgency=low

* Renamed button layouts

-- Clement Lefebvre <root@linuxmint.com> Wed, 28 Apr 2010 14:34:00 +0000

[curmudgeon]

Why do you want to make a new distro and brand it Mint? I guess it may have it's advantages.. Mint wouldn't have survived long if it wasn't for riding the coat tails of Ubuntu.. but I definitely see a problem if Mint continues to follow Ubuntu so closely, ideally Mint should branch off from Ubuntu completely and maintain it's own repos, try to follow a release such as debian (as in using the same packages, not necessarily a rolling release). I'm all for trying a new release if it's proven to be of equal quality or better than Mint, but what you're describing is making your own distro then coloring it green and calling it a 'Mint' brand.

Go forth and do it yourself. Don't ride the coat tails of Mint! Make something new, something people will want to try. Use Mint as an inspiration, but don't brand it Mint! Please!

[Craig_Dem]

Why do you want to make a new distro and brand it Mint? I guess it may have it's advantages.. Mint wouldn't have survived long if it wasn't for riding the coat tails of Ubuntu.. but I definitely see a problem if Mint continues to follow Ubuntu so closely, ideally Mint should branch off from Ubuntu completely and maintain it's own repos, try to follow a release such as debian (as in using the same packages, not necessarily a rolling release). I'm all for trying a new release if it's proven to be of equal quality or better than Mint, but what you're describing is making your own distro then coloring it green and calling it a 'Mint' brand.

Go forth and do it yourself. Don't ride the coat tails of Mint! Make something new, something people will want to try. Use Mint as an inspiration, but don't brand it Mint! Please!

This is more porting the tools of mint to Arch I think.

[Sloshy]

Why do you want to make a new distro and brand it Mint? I guess it may have it's advantages.. Mint wouldn't have survived long if it wasn't for riding the coat tails of Ubuntu.. but I definitely see a problem if Mint continues to follow Ubuntu so closely, ideally Mint should branch off from Ubuntu completely and maintain it's own repos, try to follow a release such as debian (as in using the same packages, not necessarily a rolling release). I'm all for trying a new release if it's proven to be of equal quality or better than Mint, but what you're describing is making your own distro then coloring it green and calling it a 'Mint' brand.

Go forth and do it yourself. Don't ride the coat tails of Mint! Make something new, something people will want to try. Use Mint as an inspiration, but don't brand it Mint! Please!

This is more porting the tools of mint to Arch I think.

Correct. I'll make this different from regular mint (different package management, different default applications, different installer, etc.), so it's not an exact port; just a very similar one. I can't exactly call it an official "Mint Community Edition" without Clem's permission and it'll probably never be that professional for a long time.

By the way, it's worth mentioning again that there will be LiveCD/USBs as well as post-install scripts. The scripts, I have decided, will let you easily build your system from the ground-up, picking and choosing the software you do and don't want (like if you don't need certain drivers, configurations, etc.) while the live systems will have everything at once.

[Sloshy]

While packaging the latest mint-translations package for AUR, I noticed a packaging error. In the latest mint-translations package tarball, the source folder is called "mint-translations-2010.02.02". Problem is, the files were last changed in May. The old version was just "mint-translations", so if you look at the PKGBUILD, in the "build" section at the bottom, you'll see that the directory it goes into has an ugly "2010.02.02" at the end. Rather ugly if you ask me. Whoever packaged mint-translations, fixing this would be very nice!

[Sloshy]

If anyone's curious, the latest Arch Linux snapshots have been released! These snapshots look amazing! Here's the announcement, here's the download page, and BE SURE TO READ THE DOCUMENTATION AS YOU INSTALL! Many people forget to install certain packages while installing. I'm particularly interested in the images that double as CD and USB as well as being able to work for i686 and x86_64 architectures! I hope some of you like this release!

EDIT: Ends up this was only a day before Mint 9 was released! I'll have to download both ISOs and take a peek inside and compare. I wonder if it's possible to use the Ubuntu installer with pacman without huge internal changes...?

[Sloshy]

Today, and this weekend, I'm going to work on packaging Linux Mint Artwork packages. The first of which I have completed: mint-artwork-gnome. This package contains all of the backgrounds and gnome themes that come by default in Linux Mint GNOME. Here's a screenshot of my desktop on Arch Linux using the already pre-made mintMenu package, one of the default backgrounds, and Shiki Wise:

Arch Linux with a Linux Mint desktop, the mintMenu package, and using Shiki Wise.

Workspace 2_001.png (368.88 KiB) Viewed 3497 times

Stylish, isn't it ? I'm also using DockbarX on the top to save space (with the shinybar theme). Next to that is Panflute, an amazingly awesome panel applet that lets you control your music player.

Just a quick note: all of my packages install best using yaourt or a similar Arch utility, because they usually depend on packages from the Arch User Repository.

[Sloshy]

After re-reading the messages in the topic, I can't help but feel that branding this as "Linux Mint", especially in the direction I'm going, doesn't really seem to make sense. I've decided to take the advice of a few of the posters here and branch off of mint. After thinking for about five minutes, I'm thinking of re-naming my project to something catchy. How does Spearmint Linux sound? I like that name because:

1. "Spear" references it being bleeding-edge, vanilla, and always up-to-date.
2. "Mint" refers to its Linux Mint inspiration and heritage. My new spin-off distribution will also use some of the Linux Mint tools, such as mintMenu, mintDesktop, mintUpload, and MAYBE some of the artwork; I'd have to remove any ones including Mint branding though.
3. Calling it "Linux Mint" when in reality it has a lot of changes doesn't fit very well with the project.

I'm not sure exactly what to call it though. It could be SpearMint, SpearMint Linux, Spearmint, Spearmint Linux, SpearMint OS, etc. etc. etc. If you think I should call it something different, please tell me !

Sooner or later I'll move from this forum thread to a blog or something sooner or later (wordpress/drupal, maybe?). Thank you so much, Mint community, for helping me, testing my packages, and being awesome in general ! I love Linux Mint for being so easy and powerful at the same time, and Spearmint Linux (or whatever it'll be called) would never happen if it wasn't for all of you.

PS: I'm still not entirely sure if I should make a spin-off. If you'd like, comment on my possible decision and say which spelling/version of the name (or a different name) would be the best. I'm open to any and all suggestions !

[Sloshy]

So he seened sense
I've gotta admit I'm not keen on the name lol, after Mint, Peppermint and now Spearmint people will be
wondering if Linux is a chewing-gum producer

Yeah... That's why I'm not sure on the name, or if I should even bother. I'll wait a bit longer for suggestions ^^

[mmesantos1]

Hi Sloshy,
I have been following this thread and was wondering if you are going to include a GUI that is as easy as Mints installer in your ISO? From what I understand the normal install process for Arch for someone who is versed in it is about 30 - 45 minutes. For someone that is not I have heard it can take about 1/2 to 1 day.

[FedoraRefugee]

Oops, spearmint is already copyrighted!

viewtopic.php?f=60&t=47635&p=274751&hilit=spearmint#p274751

Naw, just kidding. I really dig that name! I think it fits great with Kendall's Peppermint!

I think you are on a great track here. Arch is such an awesome base. But it scares even moderate users off. If it came on a live CD, in an easy to install format...With the Mint tools!...Yeah, this could REALLY rock! I am very much looking forward to seeing something in an ISO form.

I do have to apologize that I have not tried any of your Arch packages yet. As I run three installs of Arch in this house now I really should do that and give you some feedback. Maybe into next week I can find some time to screw around a bit.

edit: Oh, have you tried Shaman yet? Might be a good frontend for Pacman. Just a thought.

[randomizer]

Hi Sloshy,
I have been following this thread and was wondering if you are going to include a GUI that is as easy as Mints installer in your ISO?

Doesn't that remove alot of the customisation that makes Arch, well, Arch?

[mmesantos1]

Hi Sloshy,
I have been following this thread and was wondering if you are going to include a GUI that is as easy as Mints installer in your ISO?

Doesn't that remove alot of the customisation that makes Arch, well, Arch?

Yes but it would make it easy to install and try since I am not able to install the normal arch, do not have the know how.

[FedoraRefugee]

Hi Sloshy,
I have been following this thread and was wondering if you are going to include a GUI that is as easy as Mints installer in your ISO?

Doesn't that remove alot of the customisation that makes Arch, well, Arch?

Yes but it would make it easy to install and try since I am not able to install the normal arch, do not have the know how.

I agree with the first part myself. Making an easily installed distro based on Arch would allow more novice users to comfortably install it. The developer could make all the choices for the user giving them a nice complete base system rather like Mint. Then the user can just use Pacman (or better yet a GUI frontend like Shaman) to further his install like you would any other.

As far as the end part, you do not need ANY knowhow to install Arch! Just a jr. high reading ability (you WERE able to construct your last post all by yourself? ) and some patience. When you come to a choice you do not understand just go with the recommendation. If you search the Arch wiki you will find two pages; one that describes light weight apps and the other that describes normal apps. Using that information you can make wise choices to construct the desktop you want.

I am not going to say it is fast or that you will not need to digest some information and use your brain. But I will say that ANYONE can do it! My 9 year old just built his first Arch install. I walked him through it, helping on some of the decisions, but he was more than capable of following the beginners guide. It took half a day to get it installed with Xfce, then another day to figure out what apps he needs, get him the wallpapers he wanted, and get things tweaked to his satisfaction. It is now a good, stable system. You should try it, it is a great confidence booster.

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Beginners%27_Guide

Also, they just released the 2010 ISO, it might be even easier.

[mmesantos1]

I agree with the first part myself. Making an easily installed distro based on Arch would allow more novice users to comfortably install it. The developer could make all the choices for the user giving them a nice complete base system rather like Mint. Then the user can just use Pacman (or better yet a GUI frontend like Shaman) to further his install like you would any other.

As far as the end part, you do not need ANY knowhow to install Arch! Just a jr. high reading ability (you WERE able to construct your last post all by yourself? ) and some patience. When you come to a choice you do not understand just go with the recommendation. If you search the Arch wiki you will find two pages; one that describes light weight apps and the other that describes normal apps. Using that information you can make wise choices to construct the desktop you want.

I am not going to say it is fast or that you will not need to digest some information and use your brain. But I will say that ANYONE can do it! My 9 year old just built his first Arch install. I walked him through it, helping on some of the decisions, but he was more than capable of following the beginners guide. It took half a day to get it installed with Xfce, then another day to figure out what apps he needs, get him the wallpapers he wanted, and get things tweaked to his satisfaction. It is now a good, stable system. You should try it, it is a great confidence booster.

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Beginners%27_Guide

Also, they just released the 2010 ISO, it might be even easier.

This is my exact thinking. Once I do have the system installed I can start learning the basics. Just like I did when I first started using Ubuntu and Mint. I do not mind using the command line and do not mind learning how to use arch, I love learning about new OS's. I take little steps learning the system little by little. Before Linux was MS user only. I had to learn that OS, started with DOS. So just need help at first and then will get the hang of it over time.