Page 1 of 4

Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2016 2:05 am
by venik212
I have been using (L)ubuntu on several machines for the past several years. I prefer it to plain Ubuntu because of the inefficient, bloated and un-necessary ubuntu interface. In the past 2 years I have been using Lubuntu with Cinnamon, and I love that combination. It is super fast even on old hardware, nicely supports the HiDPI screen of my Yoga 2 Pro, has sensible menus, and is easily upgradable from the update manager of Lubuntu. Mint, on the other hand, prevents me from upgrading smoothly across major releases, and insists on a fresh install, involving backing up my large HOME folder, and the risk of losing some settings and data, despite the (somewhat clumsy) backup app.
So what do I get with MINT that I do not have with Lubuntu + CInnamon?

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2016 2:14 am
by chrisuk
"We" need whatever Linux Distro works best for us - if it's Lubuntu for you, then use Lubuntu. It doesn't really matter what's "under the hood", it's more about how it feels each day using a particular distro. For, me, ATM, it's Linux Mint MATE, before that it was Mint 17 Cinnamon (years ago it was SUSE Linux ;) )... who knows what I'll be using next year... that's one of the advantages of Linux - choice ;)

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2016 2:45 am
by don250r
Or we could use archLinux and Cinnamon as the DE.
Or better yet, start with the linux kernel and build your own distro. :P

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2016 2:54 am
by Moem
venik212 wrote: Mint, on the other hand, prevents me from upgrading smoothly across major releases, and insists on a fresh install
No, it probably won't. An upgrade path for Mint18 is most likely in the works.

But by all means, use what you like. I like Mint. It works for me. I don't care whether 'we' REALLY need it, whatever that means. It's just another option and it's one that I like.

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2016 3:06 am
by karlchen
<moderator on> Not a support thread, hence moved to "Chat about Linux Mint" <moderator off>

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2016 3:14 am
by Lucap
OMG! , What a mean Mod. :shock:

Just Joking...... :D :wink:

Would be nice if Mint was a constant rolling release.

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2016 3:28 am
by Moem
Lucap wrote: Would be nice if Mint was a constant rolling release.
No thanks! I want more stability than that.

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2016 4:52 am
by Pjotr
venik212 wrote:In the past 2 years I have been using Lubuntu with Cinnamon, and I love that combination.
And I thought I had seen it all... :mrgreen:

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2016 4:56 am
by sphyrth
We really need Linux, but not Mint specifically. But concerning distros, I'll just be a happy camper on this one.

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2016 5:06 am
by fraxinus_63
Mint is very very good at listening to a large user base and providing it with a product that leaves many of them highly satisfied. The wonder of Linux is the freedom it gives you to "roll your own", as you have done.

Unlike you, many of us very much prefer fixed-point to rolling release approaches, esp for stability when used in production environments. Mint's LTS releases provide a perfect balance as they are supported for so long so re-installation is seldom needed.

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2016 5:50 am
by Chiefahol
Lucap wrote:Would be nice if Mint was a constant rolling release.
I politely disagree! 8)

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2016 7:01 am
by karlchen
About the rolling release:
Does LMDE 2, Linux Mint basd on Debian Stable, not come close to it? - Though it may be rolling so slowly that no-one will notice it is moving at all. :wink:
The Ubuntu based Linux Mint releases are kind of overly agile compared to LMDE 2, are they not?

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2016 7:41 am
by MintBean
Didn't the Mint team initiate the Cinnamon project in the first place? If Mint ceased to be I suspect Cinnamon development would slow significantly.

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2016 8:10 am
by Lucap
karlchen wrote:About the rolling release:
Does LMDE 2, Linux Mint basd on Debian Stable, not come close to it? - Though it may be rolling so slowly that no-one will notice it is moving at all. :wink:
The Ubuntu based Linux Mint releases are kind of overly agile compared to LMDE 2, are they not?
http://segfault.linuxmint.com/2014/08/u ... med-betsy/
Terion - Will LMDE retain the ability to upgrade to a new release without a reinstall? I installed LMDE two weeks ago precisely because of its rolling release cycle.
clem - But any Linux system can do that, especially those based on Debian/APT. So in a way, yes you’ll be able to upgrade from on release to the next, but no it won’t be rolling or semi-rolling anymore. It should be rolling to the extent that there won’t be opt-in on the backports, so for two years you’ll be upgraded to the newer content pack / innovations / point release, but after two years or so we’ll eventually move towards LMDE 3, and then 4 etc..
:|

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2016 4:23 pm
by karlchen
Hi, Lucap.
I see. I have missed this fundamental change in LMDE 2. :oops: No more rolling Mint release.
Karl

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2016 8:56 am
by Condorman
Chiefahol wrote:
Lucap wrote:Would be nice if Mint was a constant rolling release.
I politely disagree! 8)
Me too. I think it's just good practice to wipe out and reinstall every couple of years. I do it with pretty much everything I own, phone, tablet (well, factory reset and complete wipe), PC laptop. Hell, even my PVR gets a complete reset and disk wipe every two years.

To me, the Linux landscape changes so much in the space of two years. What will happen to those folks on rolling release distros when Wayland and Mir hit? I'm guessing it won't be pretty, and there'll be no option for many other than a compete reinstall. I was more than happy personally to format my old 17.x install of Mint and create a fresh instance of version 18.

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2016 9:54 am
by linuxviolin
Condorman wrote:I think it's just good practice to wipe out and reinstall every couple of years. I do it with pretty much everything I own, phone, tablet (well, factory reset and complete wipe), PC laptop. Hell, even my PVR gets a complete reset and disk wipe every two years.

To me, the Linux landscape changes so much in the space of two years. What will happen to those folks on rolling release distros when Wayland and Mir hit? I'm guessing it won't be pretty, and there'll be no option for many other than a compete reinstall. I was more than happy personally to format my old 17.x install of Mint and create a fresh instance of version 18.
A good practice? Not really.

Rolling, or semi-rolling, à la Manjaro is quite good. Complete reinstall twice by year is just harmful, tedious, boring... At least.

Even in rolling, you can have to reinstall when there is an important change in the system, but this is rarely enough. In normal situation, no need for a reinstall. Even Windows can do it... :P

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2016 10:09 am
by Hoser Rob
Pjotr wrote:
venik212 wrote:In the past 2 years I have been using Lubuntu with Cinnamon, and I love that combination.
And I thought I had seen it all... :mrgreen:
+1. How do you combine 2 DEs that you can't run at the same time? Using Cinnamon with openbox as a WM doesn't seem like a good idea either.

I run 17.3 Xfce on my 1Gb netbook now but I had the Mate edition 17 previously. And I just installed lxde from the repos ... LXDE is not really all that actively developed anymore so you don't have to worry too much about it not being the latest version.

I'm not a fan of installing more than one DE because it often causes problems. But LXDE doesn't cause so many because it's not highly integrated. I don't think the pcmanfm file manager loads any dependencies if you install it in another DE.

It's pretty basic and you don't get a lot of nice GUI config tools with LXDE but it's really fast. On a 1Gb netbook it's just much faster. No eye candy and I really don't see much point in adding any ... if you want that you might as well use Xfce. Which I do because I just think it's nicer to use.

I know that Mint Mate 17.something with lxde installed ran LXDE better than Lubuntu 14.04 did when I had it installed, and you get 5 years support with Mate 17. You don't get that with Lubuntu.

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2016 10:16 am
by Fred Barclay
karlchen: LMDE 2 is rolling with regards to the Mint-specific tools and DEs... so we get the latest MATE/Cinnamon and Mintstick, for example.
But the package base is frozen on Debian Jessie.

Re: Do we REALLY need MINT?

Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2016 10:37 am
by Condorman
linuxviolin wrote:
Condorman wrote:I think it's just good practice to wipe out and reinstall every couple of years. I do it with pretty much everything I own, phone, tablet (well, factory reset and complete wipe), PC laptop. Hell, even my PVR gets a complete reset and disk wipe every two years.

To me, the Linux landscape changes so much in the space of two years. What will happen to those folks on rolling release distros when Wayland and Mir hit? I'm guessing it won't be pretty, and there'll be no option for many other than a compete reinstall. I was more than happy personally to format my old 17.x install of Mint and create a fresh instance of version 18.
A good practice? Not really.

Rolling, or semi-rolling, à la Manjaro is quite good. Complete reinstall twice by year is just harmful, tedious, boring... At least.

Even in rolling, you can have to reinstall when there is an important change in the system, but this is rarely enough. In normal situation, no need for a reinstall. Even Windows can do it... :P
Well, I disagree. I don't have any hard facts to back up my claims however! It's purely superstitious. :D

Yes it can be tedious and boring, but then again in my case it always encourages me to make sure I understand what I have on the system and to do backups as I know that sooner or later I will be doing a fresh install. For me, it's always been a good thing that I have learned to perform fresh installs, and I've always believed it's good practice for taking care of your hard drives. In my defence this was something told to me by the person who recommended I try Linux, and it has stuck with me. I wouldn't change it though. I don't even like to have a separate /home partition, as I don't like how old config files can affect new installs and program updates. I do have a separate partition for my files, but I don't use it as /home.