Quoting Richard Owlett (2019-04-26 14:10:02)
> On 04/26/2019 04:24 AM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > Quoting Richard Owlett (2019-04-24 19:36:29)
> >> My base setup was installed by doing
> >> apt-get --no-install-recommends install task-mate-desktop
> >> apt-get install pluma gparted synapti
On 04/26/2019 04:24 AM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
Quoting Richard Owlett (2019-04-24 19:36:29)
I'm attempting a very minimal install because:
1. small size in and of itself is a good goal
2. fending for oneself is a valuable educational experience compared
to having everything handed t
Quoting Richard Owlett (2019-04-24 19:36:29)
> I'm attempting a very minimal install because:
> 1. small size in and of itself is a good goal
> 2. fending for oneself is a valuable educational experience compared
> to having everything handed to you on a "gol
On Thu 25 Apr 2019 at 11:30:56 (+0200), Erik Josefsson wrote:
> Den 2019-04-25 kl. 07:21, skrev David Wright:
> > The only thing guaranteed by installing the "Depends" is that
> > all the function calls will point at some runnable code rather than
> > just pointing into thin air.
>
> Thin air and
Quoting Erik Josefsson (2019-04-25 11:30:56)
> [Teres debian laptop] https://box.redpill.dk/cli_with_quirks/
Obsolete: Teres-I no longer need custom-built boot-loader for Buster!
More stable to link to the top directory: https://box.redpill.dk/
- Jonas
--
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Int
On 2019-04-25 10:30, Erik Josefsson wrote:
Den 2019-04-25 kl. 07:21, skrev David Wright:
The only thing guaranteed by installing the "Depends" is that
all the function calls will point at some runnable code rather than
just pointing into thin air.
Thin air and deep waters is where I'm at.
I'm
Den 2019-04-25 kl. 07:21, skrev David Wright:
The only thing guaranteed by installing the "Depends" is that
all the function calls will point at some runnable code rather than
just pointing into thin air.
Thin air and deep waters is where I'm at.
I'm trying to set up the "tui" [text-based user
On Wed 24 Apr 2019 at 22:07:33 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 04/24/2019 08:11 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 12:36:29 -0500
> > Richard Owlett wrote:
> >
> > > I'm attempting a very minimal install because:
> > > 1. small
On 04/24/2019 08:11 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 12:36:29 -0500
Richard Owlett wrote:
I'm attempting a very minimal install because:
1. small size in and of itself is a good goal
2. fending for oneself is a valuable educational experience compared
to having every
On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 12:36:29 -0500
Richard Owlett wrote:
> I'm attempting a very minimal install because:
> 1. small size in and of itself is a good goal
> 2. fending for oneself is a valuable educational experience compared
> to having everything handed to you on
On 04/24/2019 02:31 PM, Richard Owlett wrote:
On 04/24/2019 01:10 PM, Joe wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 12:36:29 -0500
Richard Owlett wrote:
[snip]
My base setup was installed by doing
apt-get --no-install-recommends install task-mate-desktop
apt-get install pluma gparted synaptic
All it
On 04/24/2019 02:41 PM, mick crane wrote:
On 2019-04-24 18:36, Richard Owlett wrote:
I'm attempting a very minimal install because:
1. small size in and of itself is a good goal
2. fending for oneself is a valuable educational experience compared
to having everything handed to you
On 2019-04-24 18:36, Richard Owlett wrote:
I'm attempting a very minimal install because:
1. small size in and of itself is a good goal
2. fending for oneself is a valuable educational experience compared
to having everything handed to you on a "golden platter" {Debian's
On Wed 24 Apr 2019 at 12:36:29 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> I'm attempting a very minimal install because:
> 1. small size in and of itself is a good goal
Not at all. There has to be an objective, a goal. For example, a thin
client with only 1Gb of space which is intended t
On 04/24/2019 01:10 PM, Joe wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 12:36:29 -0500
Richard Owlett wrote:
I'm attempting a very minimal install because:
1. small size in and of itself is a good goal
2. fending for oneself is a valuable educational experience compared
to having everything handed t
On 04/24/2019 12:54 PM, Georgios wrote:
My minimal install include just installing standard system utilities.
I believe I accomplished that.
I build my system after that without the use of --no-install-recommends.
Its better to install recommended packages for full functionality of the
My minimal install include just installing standard system utilities.
I build my system after that without the use of --no-install-recommends.
Its better to install recommended packages for full functionality of the
installed packages.(Just my opinion)
ps. Im using xfce and i usually pick the
On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 12:36:29 -0500
Richard Owlett wrote:
> I'm attempting a very minimal install because:
> 1. small size in and of itself is a good goal
> 2. fending for oneself is a valuable educational experience compared
> to having everything handed to you on
I'm attempting a very minimal install because:
1. small size in and of itself is a good goal
2. fending for oneself is a valuable educational experience compared
to having everything handed to you on a "golden platter" {Debian's
default installer}
My current experi
On Wed, 15 Apr 2015, David Wright wrote:
> Quoting Patrick Bartek (nemomm...@gmail.com):
> > On Mon, 13 Apr 2015, David Wright wrote:
> > > Quoting Patrick Bartek (nemomm...@gmail.com):
> > > > On Sun, 12 Apr 2015, bri...@aracnet.com wrote:
> > > > > i'll second the use of openbox. i use it with
Quoting August Karlstrom (fusionf...@gmail.com):
> On 2015-04-14 17:10, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> >On Tue, 14 Apr 2015, August Karlstrom wrote:
> >>What advantages do you see with adding your own udev rule compared
> >>to simply starting a ConsoleKit session?
> >>
> >>exec ck-launch-session dbus-laun
Quoting Patrick Bartek (nemomm...@gmail.com):
> On Mon, 13 Apr 2015, David Wright wrote:
> > Quoting Patrick Bartek (nemomm...@gmail.com):
> > > On Sun, 12 Apr 2015, bri...@aracnet.com wrote:
> > > > i'll second the use of openbox. i use it with fbpanel.
> > > > i too believe that gnome just pulls
On Wed, 15 Apr 2015, August Karlstrom wrote:
> On 2015-04-14 17:10, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > On Tue, 14 Apr 2015, August Karlstrom wrote:
> >> What advantages do you see with adding your own udev rule compared
> >> to simply starting a ConsoleKit session?
> >>
> >> exec ck-launch-session dbus-lau
On 2015-04-14 17:10, Patrick Bartek wrote:
On Tue, 14 Apr 2015, August Karlstrom wrote:
What advantages do you see with adding your own udev rule compared
to simply starting a ConsoleKit session?
exec ck-launch-session dbus-launch
instead of
exec
None really, except to keep system overhea
On Tue, 14 Apr 2015 17:53:55 -0700
Patrick Bartek wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Apr 2015, Rodolfo Medina wrote:
>
> > Patrick Bartek writes:
> >
> > > Of course, if you really want TOTAL control of your GUI, a window
> > > manager is the way to go. That's what I did. Installed Openbox.
> > > The same
On Tue, 14 Apr 2015, Rodolfo Medina wrote:
> Patrick Bartek writes:
>
> > Of course, if you really want TOTAL control of your GUI, a window
> > manager is the way to go. That's what I did. Installed Openbox.
> > The same WM that LXDE uses. A little more work, but worth it.
>
> Thanks. I'm t
David Wright writes:
> The OP seems to have got something useful out of the thread. I think I'll ask
> questions about the wiki page for Bluetooth instead.
I read carefully all the messages of the thread and appreciated and am grateful
to anyone who wrote. I'm still thinking all it over.
Than
Quoting Jonathan Dowland (j...@debian.org):
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 01:09:46PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > Quoting Brian (a...@cityscape.co.uk):
> > > On Mon 13 Apr 2015 at 12:00:52 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> …
> > > > So the most I could do is set up an account just to write "This list
> >
On Tuesday 14 April 2015 20:11:30 Brian wrote:
> On Tue 14 Apr 2015 at 15:32:47 +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 01:09:46PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > > Quoting Brian (a...@cityscape.co.uk):
> > > > On Mon 13 Apr 2015 at 12:00:52 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> >
> > …
>
Patrick Bartek writes:
> Of course, if you really want TOTAL control of your GUI, a window
> manager is the way to go. That's what I did. Installed Openbox. The
> same WM that LXDE uses. A little more work, but worth it.
Thanks. I'm trying it. In the web browser, I open a new tab with C-t,
On Tue 14 Apr 2015 at 15:32:47 +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 01:09:46PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > Quoting Brian (a...@cityscape.co.uk):
> > > On Mon 13 Apr 2015 at 12:00:52 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> …
> > > > So the most I could do is set up an account just to wr
On Tue, 14 Apr 2015, August Karlstrom wrote:
> On 2015-04-14 03:20, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > The rule mounts and unmounts flash drives -- just plug and unplug
> > -- and cards (any type using an external card or multi-card
> > reader. The caveat is: you must plug the card in first, then plug
> >
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 01:09:46PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> Quoting Brian (a...@cityscape.co.uk):
> > On Mon 13 Apr 2015 at 12:00:52 -0500, David Wright wrote:
…
> > > So the most I could do is set up an account just to write "This list
> > > entry may mislead you" on the page.
…
> > You could
On 2015-04-14 03:20, Patrick Bartek wrote:
The rule mounts and unmounts flash drives -- just plug and unplug -- and
cards (any type using an external card or multi-card reader. The
caveat is: you must plug the card in first, then plug the reader in.
Unmount by unplugging reader with the card sti
On 4/13/2015 4:59 AM, Floris wrote:
and I agree that the sentence "You have to install all end-user
applications later" is incorrect.
Even Iceweasel is a dependency of gnome-core. I didn't know that
Mozilla is a part of gnome.
Floris
Epiphany is the Gnome web browser, apparently the Gnom
On Mon, 13 Apr 2015, David Wright wrote:
> [I'm hoping this isn't a duplicate post, but my first
> attempt was rejected by bendel.debian.org as forged.]
>
> Quoting Patrick Bartek (nemomm...@gmail.com):
> > On Sun, 12 Apr 2015, bri...@aracnet.com wrote:
> > > i'll second the use of openbox. i us
Quoting Brian (a...@cityscape.co.uk):
> On Mon 13 Apr 2015 at 12:00:52 -0500, David Wright wrote:
>
> > Floris kindly found a possible reference which also seemed to me to be
> > a likely candidate (the OP hasn't confirmed or otherwise).
> >
> > I looked at it with a critical eye and found some e
On Mon 13 Apr 2015 at 12:00:52 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> Floris kindly found a possible reference which also seemed to me to be
> a likely candidate (the OP hasn't confirmed or otherwise).
>
> I looked at it with a critical eye and found some errors and
> ambiguities. However, I'm not a Gnome
Quoting Steve McIntyre (93...@debian.org):
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 06:04:47PM +0200, Floris wrote:
> >
> >So the conclusion is that the information on wiki.debian.org/Gnome is
> >unclear and sometimes incorrect. I've added debian-...@lists.debian.org.
> >I understood they are the wiki maintainers
Op Mon, 13 Apr 2015 18:33:20 +0200 schreef Steve McIntyre
<93...@debian.org>:
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 06:04:47PM +0200, Floris wrote:
So the conclusion is that the information on wiki.debian.org/Gnome is
unclear and sometimes incorrect. I've added debian-...@lists.debian.org.
I understood th
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 06:04:47PM +0200, Floris wrote:
>
>So the conclusion is that the information on wiki.debian.org/Gnome is
>unclear and sometimes incorrect. I've added debian-...@lists.debian.org.
>I understood they are the wiki maintainers.
Not in terms of content, no. That's up to the whol
[I'm hoping this isn't a duplicate post, but my first
attempt was rejected by bendel.debian.org as forged.]
Quoting Patrick Bartek (nemomm...@gmail.com):
> On Sun, 12 Apr 2015, bri...@aracnet.com wrote:
> > i'll second the use of openbox. i use it with fbpanel.
> >
> > i too believe that gnome ju
Op Mon, 13 Apr 2015 17:28:29 +0200 schreef David Wright
:
Quoting Floris (jkflo...@dds.nl):
Op Sun, 12 Apr 2015 21:14:47 +0200 schreef David Wright
:
>Quoting Rodolfo Medina (rodolfo.med...@gmail.com):
>>According to documentations, gnome-core package is considered to
>>be the very
>>minima
Quoting Floris (jkflo...@dds.nl):
> Op Sun, 12 Apr 2015 21:14:47 +0200 schreef David Wright
> :
> >Quoting Rodolfo Medina (rodolfo.med...@gmail.com):
> >>According to documentations, gnome-core package is considered to
> >>be the very
> >>minimal gnome installation in Debian. But in my personal
>
On Sun, 12 Apr 2015, bri...@aracnet.com wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 18:55:54 -0700
> Patrick Bartek wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 12 Apr 2015, Rodolfo Medina wrote:
> >
>
> > Of course, if you really want TOTAL control of your GUI, a window
> > manager is the way to go. That's what I did. Installed
Op Sun, 12 Apr 2015 21:14:47 +0200 schreef David Wright
:
[I'm hoping this isn't a duplicate post, but my first
attempt was rejected by bendel.debian.org as forged.]
Quoting Rodolfo Medina (rodolfo.med...@gmail.com):
According to documentations, gnome-core package is considered to be the
ve
On 2015-04-13 07:20, bri...@aracnet.com wrote:
On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 18:55:54 -0700 Patrick Bartek
wrote:
On Sun, 12 Apr 2015, Rodolfo Medina wrote:
Of course, if you really want TOTAL control of your GUI, a window
manager is the way to go. That's what I did. Installed Openbox.
The same WM
bri...@aracnet.com writes:
the most inconvenient thing about not using gnome is not having
a way to handle USS mass storage devices.
Perhaps pmount or autofs might be of use ?
Alexis.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". T
On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 18:55:54 -0700
Patrick Bartek wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Apr 2015, Rodolfo Medina wrote:
>
> Of course, if you really want TOTAL control of your GUI, a window
> manager is the way to go. That's what I did. Installed Openbox. The
> same WM that LXDE uses. A little more work, but
d also remove gnome-core. I did so, and now gnome desktop
> environment, even without gnome-core package, seems to work well. So
> I ask to myself what gnome minimal install should really be. I have
> Sid.
>
> Thanks for any help,
Obviously, you've realized (or soon will)
now gnome
desktop environment, even without gnome-core package, seems to work well. So I
ask to myself what gnome minimal install should really be. I have Sid.
Gnome loves to pull in Evolution as well. I would think that a choice of
email client would be left to the user. Since I can't have o
now gnome
desktop environment, even without gnome-core package, seems to work well. So I
ask to myself what gnome minimal install should really be. I have Sid.
Thanks for any help,
Rodolfo
That wording doesn't really compute in my brain, but I guess you could
take it that if it is the on
> totem would also remove gnome-core. I did so, and now gnome desktop
> environment, even without gnome-core package, seems to work well. So
> I ask to myself what gnome minimal install should really be. I have
> Sid.
>
I think the answer to that depends on how long your piece of
-core package, seems to work well. So
> I
> ask to myself what gnome minimal install should really be. I have Sid.
gnome-core is a metapackage, so all it does is pull in all the
packages that depend on it. Looking at that list, that seems to give you
a selection of software that co
re package, seems to work well. So I
ask to myself what gnome minimal install should really be. I have Sid.
Thanks for any help,
Rodolfo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debia
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 07:05:25PM -0500, Kevin Mark wrote:
> >
> > something like:
> > boot computer with live cd
> > go to a terminal
> > partition the hdd
> > format the hdd
> > mount the root hdd partition as /mnt
> > use 'debootstrap .' to download the pack
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 07:05:25PM -0500, Kevin Mark wrote:
>
> something like:
> boot computer with live cd
> go to a terminal
> partition the hdd
> format the hdd
> mount the root hdd partition as /mnt
> use 'debootstrap .' to download the packages you want
> chroot to /mnt
> add kernel and
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 06:22:01AM -0800, Ottavio Caruso wrote:
> --- Ottavio Caruso wrote:
>
>
> > [Initially posted on alt.os.linux.debian, no replies.}
> >
> > I believe that one can trim down a standard debootstrap
> > installation
> > (currently 180MB for sarge and over 230 MB for etch) ha
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 06:22:01AM -0800, Ottavio Caruso wrote:
>
> At least could anybody tell me where to ask this question?
> Debian-devel, debian-boot? Debian-administration?
maybe the debian installer list, if such a thing exists (and it
probably does).
A
signature.asc
Description: Digita
--- Ottavio Caruso wrote:
> [Initially posted on alt.os.linux.debian, no replies.}
>
> I believe that one can trim down a standard debootstrap
> installation
> (currently 180MB for sarge and over 230 MB for etch) hacking one
> of
> the related scripts (eg: usr/lib/debootstrap/scripts/sarge) an
[Initially posted on alt.os.linux.debian, no replies.}
I believe that one can trim down a standard debootstrap installation
(currently 180MB for sarge and over 230 MB for etch) hacking one of
the related scripts (eg: usr/lib/debootstrap/scripts/sarge) and
modifying the 'base' variable, e.g.:
bas
I'm trying to do a minimal install of Debian 2.1. I'd like to squeeze it
into 30 MB of disk space or so for use on a 40 MB disk. This system would
need to have only very basic functionality and would be used as a
basic router, so would need the IP stack, PPP and a couple of Ethernet
dr
On Thu, 6 Mar 1997, Mike Patterson wrote:
> The problem is that I'm trying to do a debian install in less than 100
> megs. Of course this means forgoing things like X, etc... But every time
> I go through dselect and choose packages to remove, it refuses to comply!
> Instead, it complains about
On Thu, 6 Mar 1997, Mike Patterson wrote:
> The problem is that I'm trying to do a debian install in less than 100
> megs. Of course this means forgoing things like X, etc... But every time
> I go through dselect and choose packages to remove, it refuses to comply!
> Instead, it complains about f
On Thu, 6 Mar 1997, Mike Patterson wrote:
>
> I came up with an interesting challenge for myself the other day...
> Unfortunately, I can't even seem to get past square 1.
>
> I have a spare system sitting aroud doing nothing, so I thought it might be
> a good idea to put this guy to work as a
> "Mike" == Mike Patterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Mike> The problem is that I'm trying to do a debian install in
Mike> less than 100 megs. Of course this means forgoing things
Mike> like X, etc... But every time I go through dselect and
Mike> choose packages to remove, it
I came up with an interesting challenge for myself the other day...
Unfortunately, I can't even seem to get past square 1.
I have a spare system sitting aroud doing nothing, so I thought it might be
a good idea to put this guy to work as a fileserver/printserver. So far,
so good, right?
The p
--
From: salwen[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 1996 1:23 AM
To: billy.chow
Cc: debian-user
Subject: Re: X11 and LaTeX minimal install
> A minimal X (and LaTeX) installation requires several debian packages,
>but most people either do not want X or w
Different people maintain different packages. One of the main
strengths of debian is that there is an "expert" who is in control of
a package. A minimal X installation is quite large. It would be very
unfair to expect someone(who donates their time) to be able to
maintain such complex programs as
> If people are pulling the packages over a phone line there is an advantage to
> limitting the size of individual packages. That way they can hang up the
> phone periodically. Also, if a bug shows up that needs to be fixed they
> only have to download the package that is broken.
There is a pla
> A minimal X (and LaTeX) installation requires several debian packages,
>but most people either do not want X or want at least a minimal
>installation, right? So what are the justifications of splitting a
>minimal X and LaTeX the way it is?
The developers may have their own reasons for breaking
Dear debianers,
A minimal X (and LaTeX) installation requires several debian packages,
but most people either do not want X or want at least a minimal
installation, right? So what are the justifications of splitting a
minimal X and LaTeX the way it is?
Thanks.
--
Billy C.-M. Chow [EMA
72 matches
Mail list logo
