VectorLinux

Cooking up the Treats => General Development => Topic started by: uelsk8s on January 14, 2008, 03:32:07 pm

Title: VL-Light?
Post by: uelsk8s on January 14, 2008, 03:32:07 pm
Let us know what you think.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: newt on January 14, 2008, 03:55:13 pm
I wanted an 'other, please explain' category but went with 'optimize for slow systems' because perhaps that will be end result of my day dreaming ;D

Quote
Core: a fully-functioning, very-light-weight CLI release (i.e. no X implementation) centering around creating the engine that drives Standard and SOHO/Deluxe (perhaps, by definition, this will REQUIRE including X, but perhaps not). No desktop environment or window managers included.  Very light on the resources.  Not intended for use by 95+% of users; only for the hard-core; only for devs; only for capable hackers; only for those that love white text on a black background.

You know (probably not cause I never mentioned it) but the ck kernel for vl58 worked terribly on my laptop.  IIRC, the biggest problem were application crashes when I tried starting them (I think wifi-radar was one that I recall).  I'd have to load it back on my system to know the full implecations because I don't remember exactly.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: uelsk8s on January 14, 2008, 04:06:30 pm
newtor,
Can you try the Ck-kernels for 5.9 and see how they do?
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 14, 2008, 04:54:53 pm
Quote
Not intended for use by 95+% of users

That would make it very 1337, only 5% of users being inclined to use it. I'm a refurbisher of computers and I might want to download a pared down version of VL for the purpose of installing it on a low-end computer. I don't have a clue how to pare down Standard to accomplish that purpose. A person like myself might represent a greater number of potential downloaders/users than the 5% 1337 hacker estimate. Are we interested in numbers here? That is, the greatest number of downloads. Or are we mainly interested in utility, advanced customization/optimization.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: Darin on January 14, 2008, 05:22:55 pm
Everyone please give impressions please so we can start on a direction to take. I do think having X and a WM is not going to add to much to the footprint and if not being able to to use X really means the computer is just to dang old. I do think we need to throw in a section about using either xdm or kdm as kdm ups the system resources
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: kidd on January 14, 2008, 06:02:32 pm
We shouldn't forget one of VL's greatest features:  Everything works out of the box.  Trimming down VL would make harder  to build up a functional system, so we have to keep in mind we would be ressembling Arch.

Myself I don't use Xfce nor most of VL default apps, but I love not having to mess with java,mp3 firefox plugins, flash and so.... same for dvd playing.  For me it would be great to keep that killer features, and wiping out all apps that can be installed with just a 'slapt-get --install'.  X, fluxbox, firefox, mplayer, wifi apps and slapt-get /gslapt. 

dev tools should be ripped too????   I like having them all, and being able to compile nearly everything out of the box, but if we want a 'minimal' system....
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: uelsk8s on January 14, 2008, 06:08:33 pm
I agree on the dev tools as well, you wouldnt want to compile on most old systems anyway.
do we get rid of perl also?
what about python?
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: rbistolfi on January 14, 2008, 07:14:08 pm
I am hoping to see VL Light intended for small desktops. It would run on ~64 mb systems. As kidd pointed, the strongest thing in VL is it is full featured out of the box. I agree with Darin we dont need to rip X, but a few cli apps can make a full featured desktop with just a few kb of ram / disk and some cpu cycles. For example, links, weechat, some msn cli app (I have one installed but I forgot the name) vim, mp3blaster, etc. Perhaps once defined the goal of this version we could start a thread about the apps to include beyond the core. I dunno about the dev tools. One nice feature of vl is it is easy to compile stuff on it, but perhaps we'll have to let them go with some libs. But no dev tools means "full featured".
Also, accepting the fact each day is harder to keep a small / fast distro, I would like to see VL Light to take the Dynamite spirit and serve as an experimenting field for Standard, looking for creative ways of getting more features with less resources and in a better, simpler way. Even when I think VL std is almost the perfect system, showing a great balance between features and resources needed, there is always room for improvement.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: exeterdad on January 14, 2008, 09:04:47 pm
Yanking Perl should be interesting  :)  It's key to so many apps.

I vote Fluxbox.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: Triarius Fidelis on January 14, 2008, 10:09:04 pm
I agree on the dev tools as well, you wouldnt want to compile on most old systems anyway.
do we get rid of perl also?
what about python?

Retaining some development tools would be necessary. Perl would be virtually impossible to get rid of. Python, I don't know. It might be a dep somewhere.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: newt on January 14, 2008, 11:07:35 pm
newtor,
Can you try the Ck-kernels for 5.9 and see how they do?
I will but tomorrow evening would be the soonest.  I ran out of time today and work calls my name tomorrow :'(.  Fortunately, I have tomorrow evening free and a hockey game to watch so it's perfect timing ;D

To be honest, I didn't have the best experience with vl59 on my laptop.  I struggled too much to get things working so I scrapped it and went back to vl58, however I'd like to have a pleasantly working vl59 installation so I'll give it another go.  I'll let you know of any/all problems I encounter along the way - in the correct thread of course :D.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: BlueMage on January 14, 2008, 11:31:22 pm
I'd think of VL-Light being a system which has the Xserver already in place, but without any desktop environment or windows manager (except twm or similar for example - really basic) and have it a) optimised for slow hardware and b) be set up so the end-user can customise it almost from the ground up, without having to remove a swath of pre-installed programs.  Basically, what newtor quoted.

Granted, not for everyone, but for folks who get into it, get intrigued and want to go further, but don't want the hassle/heartache of tearing out programs.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: GrannyGeek on January 15, 2008, 12:05:25 am
I said we don't need it. It would take developers' time and attention and I think we need that elsewhere.

There already are ultralight distros. Why create another one? There's no need to have a VectorLinux for every possible user.
--GrannyGeek
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: alec on January 15, 2008, 05:34:23 am
How about just adding to the standard installer an option to install a really stripped-down version. With incline to lower disk space and memory needed rather than cpu (how much more can you get it optimized for cpu anyway?).
Say default gets you kdm+xfce+goodies
stripped down gives fluxbox and all goodies optional.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: Triarius Fidelis on January 15, 2008, 05:52:59 am
How about just adding to the standard installer an option to install a really stripped-down version. With incline to lower disk space and memory needed rather than cpu (how much more can you get it optimized for cpu anyway?).
Say default gets you kdm+xfce+goodies
stripped down gives fluxbox and all goodies optional.

Only fifteen posts in and already you have said something very wise. :)
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: Darin on January 15, 2008, 06:05:21 am
I said we don't need it. It would take developers' time and attention and I think we need that elsewhere.

There already are ultralight distros. Why create another one? There's no need to have a VectorLinux for every possible user.
--GrannyGeek

Actually I disagree with that statement. I am the lead guy for the supergamer livedvd's and the supergamer vl edition. I already have a trimmed down version for our testing. As for taking time, it's actually alittle easier to start with a basic for testing then add upwards to get the desktop and not the other way around in bug reporting as we can track down what is broke alot easier with doing minimul updates. The pupose of this thread is not to increase the work load as I am sure at this point in the discussion a slimmed down version seems what most people are looking at that can boot on lower end systems and have a installed size of under 2gb. I already went that route with the pclinuxos versions and I can tell you for a fact that having a small base is alot easier to bug report. Uelsk8s has a copy of this iso already so some things are rolling already we just need to define what if anything others would want.
Also the purpose is to have Vector for everything. World domination is not a bad goal :)
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 15, 2008, 06:09:52 am
How about just adding to the standard installer an option to install a really stripped-down version. With incline to lower disk space and memory needed rather than cpu (how much more can you get it optimized for cpu anyway?).
Say default gets you kdm+xfce+goodies
stripped down gives fluxbox and all goodies optional.
You just described the current STD
My idea of a lite version was to remove the heaviest things (xfce4 being one of them) and replace them with lighter things
you could do something like JWM + idesk to get a nice desktop like the one here http://xs.to/xs.php?h=xs123&d=08023&f=59screenie.png
that could also be done with fluxbox, but honestly, I prefer a well configured jwm over fluxbox any day (just me)

Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: saulgoode on January 15, 2008, 08:13:27 am
I said we don't need it. It would take developers' time and attention and I think we need that elsewhere.

There already are ultralight distros. Why create another one? There's no need to have a VectorLinux for every possible user.

If a light version of VL is not expected to attract new developers (and testers.. and documenters..) then I would mostly agree with you. However, it is my opinion that there exists a market amongst hardware hackers, system recyclers, and "appliance" experimenters for a distro that not only runs on low-end systems, but provides a convenient pathway for growth to a full-blown and standard Linux. There is a particular benefit to be had by releasing a version which caters to these "geeks" and seeks to attract their participation in the Vector community.

None of the currently available ultralight distros (DeLi, DSL, Puppy, NimbleX, and Wolvix Cub) target this market, nor are any of them particularly suited for such installations. Their goal in releasing a lighter version is in most cases focused on LiveCD operation which in general does not provide the installation flexibility needed for older systems. They do not tend to have as priorities being "standard" Linux -- they will employ "oddball" filesystems (cramfs, unionfs, fat32), custom package management, and/or offer no upgrade path from a rather restrictive GTK1.2/uClib base to a more "full-blown" system. NOTE: I intend no disrespect towards these distros -- they are ingenious and viable solutions in many situations -- they just don't provide the solution which a VL-Light would supply.

Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 15, 2008, 08:25:16 am
Well said soulgoode.
Completely agree
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: rbistolfi on January 15, 2008, 09:14:50 am
I like what Saulgoode is saying as well, and it put some light on the dev-tools / perl / python topic. Those persons described by Saulgoode as possible vl light users seems to aprecciate dev tools. In the other hand, they are damn too big, I think we need to think about that, and some more opinions on the topic could help :). A geek could easily slapt-get them. I vote to replace as much as we can the X heavy apps with light ones (as Moe suggested) or cli ones, in favor of some dev tools.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: Freeman on January 15, 2008, 10:36:32 am
In my opinion we have to trim Vl down to the bare minimum. That means a working X with no utilities, absolutely none (as they can be approached if necessary by the user through Gslapt). With that working X we could provide the lightest DE possible, with possibility for icons on the desktop.

In short, VL-Light needs the following:
- X (working out of the box with Nvidia/ati drivers if needed)
- Log-on manager (KDM, ...)
- Superlight DE/WM (IceWM, JWM, ...)
- Icon handling for desktop
- no apps except:
      - 1 terminal
      - 1 browser
      - Midnight commander
      - Dev tools

The idea is that the user can choose afterwards what he wants his system to be. A fully functional server, a mail server, a hardware firewall, a system with only the packages he wants, only CLI,... Give people choice by offering the bare minimum.

Just my 2 cents ;)
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: Triarius Fidelis on January 15, 2008, 11:53:46 am
Not everyone has a fast connection and some need to install to boxes without network connections. Bear that in mind.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 15, 2008, 01:36:19 pm
I Agree with hanu there... however, if you do not have a high speed connection, then you'd appreciate the small iso as well ;)

I think what VL-LITE needs to have is this


That should give us a light but fairly useful release.
The idea is to keep it simple, but make it look good and most of all, make it useful. The last thing we want is an ugly looking desktop without any useful software.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: exeterdad on January 15, 2008, 01:46:31 pm
If XFE is a file manager, that will supply a very simple text editor and a few others.  Fox is a dep of XFE and it supplies editors, shutterbug, calculator and a few more.  Both XFE and Fox are pretty tiny for what they deliver.

So I'll backup MOE on XFE.  XFE also has plenty of handy right click features.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 15, 2008, 01:55:31 pm
and can also be configured to look fairly descent
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 15, 2008, 06:00:07 pm
You don't really need XDM or KDM. People who would want this are capable of typing startx. Or slapt-get --install xdm.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 15, 2008, 06:18:42 pm
i'm sure they are but it would look ugly
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: Witek Mozga on January 16, 2008, 01:24:23 am
Not everyone has a fast connection and some need to install to boxes without network connections. Bear that in mind.

Right to the point! When I first tested linux distros - a few years ago - I did not have a fast internet connection. Thus when I finnaly got a distro (from a friend or a paper magazine) I expected it to have many apps such as mplayer, gimp etc. That is why I ended up with Vector SOHO. It could be usable as home desktop even without net.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: Witek Mozga on January 16, 2008, 01:31:17 am
In my opinion we have to trim Vl down to the bare minimum. [...]
- X (working out of the box with Nvidia/ati drivers if needed)

ehm... nvidia/ati within the bare minimum?? By the way, don`t they need kernel sources to compile and install modules?
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: Witek Mozga on January 16, 2008, 04:43:07 am
  • Seamonkey (takes care of the need for browser, mail reader, chat client, etc)

Seamonkey in a system optimized for slower hardware  ???
I`d rather split its usability among browser (Opera?) mail client (Sylpheed?), newsreader (Pan?)

Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M-ake on January 16, 2008, 05:59:53 am
Regarding the login manager have you thought about slim ? http://slim.berlios.de/
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 16, 2008, 06:22:00 am
Regarding the login manager have you thought about slim ? http://slim.berlios.de/
Looks like a good option. From what I see it looks better than XDM
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: Colonel Panic on January 16, 2008, 06:48:51 am
I said we don't need it. It would take developers' time and attention and I think we need that elsewhere.

There already are ultralight distros. Why create another one? There's no need to have a VectorLinux for every possible user.

If a light version of VL is not expected to attract new developers (and testers.. and documenters..) then I would mostly agree with you. However, it is my opinion that there exists a market amongst hardware hackers, system recyclers, and "appliance" experimenters for a distro that not only runs on low-end systems, but provides a convenient pathway for growth to a full-blown and standard Linux. There is a particular benefit to be had by releasing a version which caters to these "geeks" and seeks to attract their participation in the Vector community.

None of the currently available ultralight distros (DeLi, DSL, Puppy, NimbleX, and Wolvix Cub) target this market, nor are any of them particularly suited for such installations. Their goal in releasing a lighter version is in most cases focused on LiveCD operation which in general does not provide the installation flexibility needed for older systems. They do not tend to have as priorities being "standard" Linux -- they will employ "oddball" filesystems (cramfs, unionfs, fat32), custom package management, and/or offer no upgrade path from a rather restrictive GTK1.2/uClib base to a more "full-blown" system. NOTE: I intend no disrespect towards these distros -- they are ingenious and viable solutions in many situations -- they just don't provide the solution which a VL-Light would supply.


I use Deli sometimes and like it, and I think it fills its particular niche very well, but to get a distro to work within the limits Haary sets (he doesn't assume even 32 MB or a Pentium II processor) is pretty much a full time operation for one developer and requires relentless selection and paring down of libraries. You can't run Opera in Deli for instance because Deli is built with uclibc.

I basically agree with M0E here. What I'd suggest for Vector Lite is a sort of desktop Puppy; JWM, Seamonkey and rox or something similar for file management. You could even have siag instead of Abiword and Gnumeric.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: alec on January 16, 2008, 07:01:45 am
Quote
Seamonkey (takes care of the need for browser, mail reader, chat client, etc)
Seamonkey in a system optimized for slower hardware  ???
I`d rather split its usability among browser (Opera?) mail client (Sylpheed?), newsreader (Pan?)
Agree, Seamonkey is quite heavy even if its versatile.
And if you go Opera way, it DOES have a mail and newsreader (not to mention RSS, IRC, download manager and torrent), and I use those (all of them  ;D) as my main options. Yet its not for everyone.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 16, 2008, 07:20:20 am
Seems that opera is a better choice. I stand corrected.
However, It seems it does not do IRC after all. I dont see that listed in the features
But something else (ie pidgin) could do that. We need pidgin anyway
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 16, 2008, 07:59:47 am
I have not actually used it, but I do see an IRC option in Opera Chat.

It's an acquired taste, but Opera is a great suite. Much more than just a browser.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 16, 2008, 08:11:00 am
then I change my vote to opera then
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: lagagnon on January 16, 2008, 11:52:20 am
Seems that opera is a better choice. I stand corrected.
However, It seems it does not do IRC after all. I dont see that listed in the features
Yes it does do IRC, under the Chat menu heading. That's why I use Opera: browser, email, IRC chat, feeds, newsgroups, notes - all rolled into one reasonably fast application.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 16, 2008, 12:46:15 pm
The only thing I have against opera is that every time I start using it... after a while it segfaults on me and I can't use it anymore after that... so I come back to FF
BTW, I found the chat feature... I think I even like it better than xchat ;)
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 16, 2008, 02:04:27 pm
This morning I was testing the recently released "TinyMe" LiveCD from PCLinuxOS. I couldn't help but think about this thread. It uses Opera and a light WM (Openbox). The file manager PCMan looks good.

Trying it out may be good for brainstorming. Right now I don't have a slow computer to test it on, maybe someone with a P2 or 3 could give it a spin?
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 16, 2008, 02:07:23 pm
WoW!... PCMan does look awesome
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 16, 2008, 04:58:56 pm
apps:

vlc
xine
xmms
abiword
grafburn*
xpdf
dillo
geany
JWM/IceWM
xarchiver
wget

These are apps that I would put on a small OS. How would this go? I would install VL-Lite and then use Gslapt or slapt-get to obtain these apps, or would some or most apps be included in the basic install?

Has anyone done a tally on just how big is the ISO for VL-Lite with no apps? If 200 MB is the target size for the ISO how much space is available beyond the bare minimum?

We should decide on a target size, even if it's only a temporary goal? What's it gonna be, 200 MB or 300 MB?


* TinyMe uses grafburn
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 17, 2008, 07:35:29 am
Reality Check:

I liked the way the TinyMe live disc was working, but got to thinking of it, all testing was done on "Giga" class computers. I still have some boxes in the "Mega" class, but they are busy as headless servers. I dug around in my parts bin and found enough to cobble together a P3-600/64.

To get TinyMe to even load, I first had to create a swap partition on the hard drive. Then it took about 30 minutes for it to load up, launch the installer and fail without warning or explanation.

In about the same time, I installed VL 5.9 on this ancient box. Xfce runs, but that's about it. With Fluxbox or JWM however, the machine is usable for light duties.

This little trip down memory lane reminded me why I am using VL today. The text installer is fast and reliable. Easy access to the command line lets you troubleshoot and build up your system in steps, and see errors as they occur. This is great when you're working with old hardware of unproven reliability. And gives you a FAST end result.

I can see where VL-Light fits in. Same thing with SOHO/KDE. However, I'm having trouble getting comfortable with XFCE. It lies somewhere in between these two. Too heavy to be a speed demon, and too limited to satisfy my DE wants. If I was King, VL-Light would be the new VL Std.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: Freeman on January 17, 2008, 11:30:44 am
Have to agree with Nightflier here, Xfce is just in the middle. We need something lighter to keep the desktop up.

I think we all agree to the following apps:
- Opera
- Xfe
- Slim

Open for discussion/still not decided:
- JWM / IceWM / ...
- Icons on desktop
- Size of the cd
- Other apps

To raise the bar a little, so all noses point to the same direction, I think we need something like 'minimal specs for 100% stable/speedy usability'. Would I be to optimistic to say: Pentium 2 - 64 MB Ram, with 2 GB of HD ?
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: uelsk8s on January 17, 2008, 11:44:33 am
- Slim Was very buggy last time  I tried it. I think we will start with Xdm

Open for discussion/still not decided:
- JWM / IceWM / ... the jwm package is 63kb so I think it will be in regardless
- Icons on desktop   I am not sure about this yet????
- Size of the cd    I think we will be around 350mb to start
- Other apps       voice your opinions or better yet get the source and build some of them Siag office comes to mind
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 17, 2008, 11:49:44 am
I was gonna favor an ISO size of 200 MB, but since uelsk8s says it's around 350 now, I suggest setting 300 MB as a goal. But I could live with 350 MB, which is half a full CD (700 MB). Not more than 350 MB.

Another thing to consider is that a smaller, more efficient VL version will likely be installed on very nice, even high-end boxes as well, for the extra speed and efficiency. We shouldn't shortchange that kind of user.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 17, 2008, 12:09:14 pm
Icons on desktop is a must to me.... so even if you dont do it... I will...

Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: lagagnon on January 17, 2008, 12:18:09 pm
My suggestions for apps:

window manager: jwm
icons on desktop: no (put wbar in, to be loaded if wanted)
file manager: xfe (or xffm), mc
Cd burning: bashburn
browser: lynx, dillo, opera
editor: medit, vi
other internet stuff: transmission, gftp, pidgin, chestnut dialer
office: siag spreadsheet, abiword, xpdf, galculator
accessories: catfish, wbar, xscreensaver(?)
terminal: mrxvt
multimedia: xmms plus the smaller of xine or mplayer
games: 2D stuff and perhaps the "l" series (ltris, lbreakout2, etc.)

-remove "info" packages, all "include" files (???), no nvidia-ati drivers, sox and image-magick stuff, etc...
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 17, 2008, 12:20:33 pm
Correct me if I am wrong: we are following the TinyME model rather than MiniME, since the latter is for advanced users who want to customize from a KDE base. The TinyME model is aimed at low-end machines and is a self-sufficient OS, more or less.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: uelsk8s on January 17, 2008, 12:31:11 pm
huh? whats tinyme/minime   :)
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 17, 2008, 12:36:10 pm
Tiny/Mini: I don't think anyone was suggesting following either as a model. There was just some suggestions to see what apps were used in there. Both of those are remasters, based on a major, heavy distro and come as Live discs only.

I was looking at the file manager PCMan, but it looks like that is a one man show and not actively developed right now.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: exeterdad on January 17, 2008, 12:46:31 pm
Removing all include files is a bad idea I think.  There will be no way to replace them if a user needs to compile something.  Unless we somehow create a "include-bulk.tlz" and then rip them out.  The user can install the include bulk, build some stuff and then uninstall if needed.  We shouldn't leave so many people up the creek without a paddle.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 17, 2008, 12:51:18 pm
I am biased in favor of xine. There was a time I was comparing the two media players, and I am certain that xine is lighter than mplayer. I favor xine. I'm also gonna put VLC on a machine, redundant or not.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: easuter on January 17, 2008, 01:32:52 pm
if we remove include files, then we may as well remove GCC and other dev tools as well, as they go hand in hand....
Why does everyone hate the headers?  :)
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: Witek Mozga on January 17, 2008, 02:41:40 pm
To tell the truth, everybody imagine VL-light in a different way: some want icons, others do not, some want video drivers, others don`t, etc. Never mind... as in my opinion VL-light already exists. It is called Slackware. When installing it you can select what packages you need and you can install as much stripped version as suited for your needs. Can you do better than that?

The field where you already did much better than Slackware is desktop use for home and office. Follow this road.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: Joe1962 on January 17, 2008, 03:04:46 pm
I am prejudiced in favor of xine. There was a time I was comparing the two media players, and I am certain that xine is lighter than mplayer. I favor xine. I'm also gonna put VLC on a machine, redundant or not.
Actually gmplayer is heavier than xine, but try "mplayer path_to_video_file" from a terminal and prepare to be amazed... :o

I did some testing a couple of years ago on my previous P4 laptop with intel video and people were amazed when they saw 9 mplayers running 9 different videos, without visible frame dropping or slowdowns, all while throtled down to 700 MHz with vcpufreq. I was showing off to a couple of colleagues today and got 12 mplayers comfortably working on my current laptop with ATI video, while throttled down to about 1 GHz.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: newt on January 17, 2008, 03:45:55 pm
To tell the truth, everybody imagine VL-light in a different way: some want icons, others do not, some want video drivers, others don`t, etc. Never mind... as in my opinion VL-light already exists. It is called Slackware.
Of course everybody imagines vl-light in a different way which is the reason why people have differing opinions of how VL-Light should turn out to be in the end and the packages that should be included.  No single person is going to end up with VL-Light EXACTLY how they invision; instead it will be _close_ to most folks representation of it in their heads.  It's exactly these things that this thread is trying to flush out of folks.... ideas, suggestions, direction, etc. In addition to that, Light aims to  be provided in a (relatively speaking) small package - get a fully-functioning, high-quality desktop distro with great speed (even on older hardware) in under XXX downloaded megabytes.

When installing it [slackware] you can select what packages you need and you can install as much stripped version as suited for your needs.
You can certainly custom install slackware to get a light distro - that's for sure - BUT you must first download ~650mb to get CD1.  I think the intentions of Light is to cut that size by around half.

When installing it [slackware] you can select what packages you need and you can install as much stripped version as suited for your needs.
Can you do better than that?
Yes, I DO believe so AND in nearly half the downloadable size ;) ;D
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: rbistolfi on January 17, 2008, 04:38:51 pm
To tell the truth, everybody imagine VL-light in a different way: some want icons, others do not, some want video drivers, others don`t, etc. Never mind... as in my opinion VL-light already exists. It is called Slackware. When installing it you can select what packages you need and you can install as much stripped version as suited for your needs. Can you do better than that?

The field where you already did much better than Slackware is desktop use for home and office. Follow this road.

WM, I think VL Light is already in the way, perhaps the time of "dont do it" is gone and is time to be constructive and help to define it ;)

I did some testing a couple of years ago on my previous P4 laptop with intel video and people were amazed when they saw 9 mplayers running 9 different videos, without visible frame dropping or slowdowns, all while throtled down to 700 MHz with vcpufreq. I was showing off to a couple of colleagues today and got 12 mplayers comfortably working on my current laptop with ATI video, while throttled down to about 1 GHz.

Not only that, the gui seems to not work very well, at least in my box. And I find it quite heavy or slow for a pretty small gui as it is.

high-quality desktop distro with great speed (even on older hardware) in under XXX downloaded megabytes.
he eh um he huh, Newtor said "XXX" ;D
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: saulgoode on January 17, 2008, 05:48:10 pm
To tell the truth, everybody imagine VL-light in a different way: some want icons, others do not, some want video drivers, others don`t, etc. Never mind... as in my opinion VL-light already exists. It is called Slackware. When installing it you can select what packages you need and you can install as much stripped version as suited for your needs. Can you do better than that?

The short answer to your question is, "yes, we can do better" (or at least "different"). Slackware does not provide a minimal set of packages that would constitute a developed and tested installation. If you leave out packages when installing Slackware, you no longer have the full assurance of your system's integrity. Patryk expects users to do a full install (of at least the first two SW CDs) or you are pretty much left to your own devices as far as ensuring that your installation is complete enough and that all of your dependencies are satisfied. There are tagfile recommendations and packages flagged as "essential", but even those offer no assurance of the functionality of a less-than-complete Slackware installation. To Slackware's infinite credit, the reliability of such a subset installation is generally excellent -- but it is not a focus of the Slackware team.

A VL-Light could provide a developed, tested, and maintained minimal installation; something Slackware does not offer.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: Joe1962 on January 17, 2008, 09:04:02 pm
I did some testing a couple of years ago on my previous P4 laptop with intel video and people were amazed when they saw 9 mplayers running 9 different videos, without visible frame dropping or slowdowns, all while throtled down to 700 MHz with vcpufreq. I was showing off to a couple of colleagues today and got 12 mplayers comfortably working on my current laptop with ATI video, while throttled down to about 1 GHz.

Not only that, the gui seems to not work very well, at least in my box. And I find it quite heavy or slow for a pretty small gui as it is.
Huh? I don't understand... Maybe you quoted the wrong bit?
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 17, 2008, 11:00:54 pm
When I was comparing xine and mplayer, I very distinctly recall reading a disclaimer on mplayer's website that it was intended for computers over 500 MHz. This disclaimer has been echoed in several comparative reviews of media players as well. On the other hand I have personally experienced xine playing a DVD smoothly on a 350 MHz computer, and I would speculate that xine would work passably on a 300 MHz box with sufficient RAM.

Re: mplayer...honestly, I have trouble with the GUI. In fact the interface is such a pain that I have not taken the time to use it enough to remember how to use it next time.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: uelsk8s on January 17, 2008, 11:25:15 pm
here is what i have so far: http://vectorlinux.osuosl.org/Uelsk8s/iso-test/VL5.9-Light-A1.2.iso
choose the vesa option when you get to the xorg setup screen.
when you get to xdm you type username and password then enter for jwm or F1 for fluxbox
the menu's for jwm and flux are not fixed yet and I need someone that can make new ones, when we get an apps list together.
opera doesnt play flash too well , and you will need to get sdl and openal for mplayer to work
let me know what you think

Uelsk8s
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: Witek Mozga on January 18, 2008, 12:56:00 am
WM, I think VL Light is already in the way, perhaps the time of "dont do it" is gone and is time to be constructive and help to define it ;)

OK. Ranting time is over. Anyway I cannot imagine usable desktop without konqueror and k3b. For me then the VL-light version is:

- terminal
- mc, nano/pico
- wget
- dev tools (gcc)
- IceWM desktop with icons
- simple file manager (ROX)
- Sylpheed (mail)
- torrent client
- mplayer (gui not necessary) and mencoder with codecs
- xmms
- xpdf
- xarchiever
- geany (versatile text editor)
- k3b
- konqueror (as browser and powerfull tool for ftp, file-managing, etc)
- gslapt with big repo
- (optionaly wine)
- (optionaly knode)

no games, no ati/nvidia drivers, no flash, no office software, no xfce

I`m not sure how much space these would take but should fit within 300MB.


Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 18, 2008, 05:15:39 am
I hope we can avoid the implementation of apps run without GUI (eg. bashburn, mplayer), because this amounts to having unlisted apps that many users will not even know are there.

vlc
xine
xmms
abiword
grafburn
xpdf
dillo
geany
JWM/IceWM
xarchiver
wget

Undecided: Opera, wbar, gnumeric, Xfe, terminal

VL Lite is starting to look a lot like Puppy. I think we can do better than ROX file manager. I do like the one-click functionality of Puppy. (Everything opens on one mouse click.)
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: rbistolfi on January 18, 2008, 05:33:58 am
A .desktop could be made for some of them, like "htop". Also some files like the video ones could be associated with mplayer by default, in that way you keep the goodies of cli apps without loosing "usability".
 
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 18, 2008, 05:55:55 am
here is what i have so far: http://vectorlinux.osuosl.org/Uelsk8s/iso-test/VL5.9-Light-A1.2.iso

Uel, you are a saint! This is the kind of fun a small and responsive community can come up with  ;D

Before you really can use this one, it is necessary to edit your menu so you can launch a terminal. I just replaced the "terminal" entry with "xterm".

I would suggest copying the default /usr/etc/system.jwmrc to a .jwmrc file in each user's home dir. That way it's easier to configure and customize. Fluxbox already has it's config file in the .fluxbox dir. How about just creating a menu entry "Edit menu" that launches the config file in a text editor?

I can take on the task of doing the menu files.


Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 18, 2008, 06:04:34 am
VL Lite is starting to look a lot like Puppy

It may "look" that way, but the differences are substantial. VL is a traditional "install to hard drive" system that can easily be expanded using the repo, Slackware packages or by compiling from source.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 18, 2008, 07:40:33 am
Interesting: According to htop, JWM used 8-10 MB more memory than Fluxbox (mid 40's vs. mid 30's). That is a very significant difference.

I took out the entry in .jwmrc that set the background wallpaper and voila! JWM now uses slightly less than Fluxbox. This way it shows the background from the login manager, which looks very good, by the way.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: uelsk8s on January 18, 2008, 07:52:50 am
we have to thank m-ake for that BG, it is very nice.
So you have it running there with less than 40mb ram?
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 18, 2008, 08:05:49 am
Cold boot to JWM with htop in xterm shows 37 MB. This is with static IP, no services enabled.

I bet it can be tweaked even further. When I tried a similar minimalistic setup in 5.9 Std, I got 36 MB when using Fluxbox.

Edit: Going through TUI login, no bootsplash, and issuing startx, it weighs in at 31 MB (no wallpaper).
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: Freeman on January 18, 2008, 10:09:16 am
vlc / xine
xmms
abiword
grafburn
xpdf
dillo
geany
JWM/IceWM
xarchiver
wget
It would be fun to have: JWM/Fluxbox and IceWM... I like the simplicity of IceWM, I guess older users with less great hardware, are also custom to use IceWM as they did with VL 5.1 in the days ;)

Abiword, I think is a little to heavy... dunno.. someone?

Code: [Select]
Undecided: Opera, wbar, gnumeric, Xfe, terminalDidn't we allready decided to have Opera and Xfe in?

Code: [Select]
I do like the one-click functionality of Puppy. (Everything opens on one mouse click.)This would be nice to have. Desktop icons, no one admits they want it, but in the end, everybody uses them :) So I think it would be great to have them in.

Did I allready told you guys that I love Grub? :D
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: uelsk8s on January 18, 2008, 10:48:45 am
Alpha-1.3 is up
http://vectorlinux.osuosl.org/Uelsk8s/iso-test/VL5.9-Light-A1.3.iso
added xgalaga
added siag office suite
upgraded opera to 9.50b1 its the only one i could get to do flash
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 18, 2008, 10:51:16 am
Downloading to try this evening ;)
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 18, 2008, 12:08:22 pm
howto install Puppy to hdd
...
Maybe this should go in the HOWTO section?  ;)

Anyways, I know that it is possible to do this, but that is an add-on to a distro which is designed to be run "Live".
Now off to the next release to get some more play in before I go off working!
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: uelsk8s on January 18, 2008, 12:30:48 pm
i just remembered this
http://vectorlinux.osuosl.org/Uelsk8s/iso-test/VL5.9-Light-A1.2to1.3.delta
7.3mb
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M-ake on January 18, 2008, 01:01:56 pm
Hmm btw if its graphics you need then I can try when ever I find the free time.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: exeterdad on January 18, 2008, 01:26:33 pm
Hmm btw if its graphics you need then I can try when ever I find the free time.
Have I mentioned today that I'm enjoying the heck outta my new vlaqua wallpaper?
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 18, 2008, 02:02:16 pm
Alpha-1.3 is up
http://vectorlinux.osuosl.org/Uelsk8s/iso-test/VL5.9-Light-A1.3.iso
added xgalaga
added siag office suite
upgraded opera to 9.50b1 its the only one i could get to do flash

Ai, xgalaga.. that takes me back, although my favorites were Asteroids and Space Invaders.

Opera works well here, including flash.

siag or pw:
Warning: Cannot convert string "-*-helvetica-medium-r-*-*-12-*-*-*-*-*-iso8859-*" to type FontStruct
Panic: can't load any fonts!


egon:
Segmentation fault
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: exeterdad on January 18, 2008, 02:21:37 pm
Quote
siag or pw:
Warning: Cannot convert string "-*-helvetica-medium-r-*-*-12-*-*-*-*-*-iso8859-*" to type FontStruct
Panic: can't load any fonts!

Hmmmm  that's odd.  I noticed a error like that when running xgalaga from cli in 5.9 Gold.  The fonts are there, but I've no clue how to resolve.  Actually the fonts were a adobe variant.  But much the same error.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 18, 2008, 02:46:13 pm
I made a config file for JWM where it's barebone and only the working menu entries are included.

If you create a file in the home directory called .jwmrc and paste the following content in there it gives you a little better idea of what's included and not. Unlike Fluxbox, you have to restart JWM to see the results of any edits.
Code: [Select]
<?xml version="1.0"?>

<JWM>

    <!-- The root menu, if this is undefined you will not get a menu. -->
   <!-- Additional RootMenu attributes: onroot, labeled, label -->
   <RootMenu height="20">
      <!-- Addititional Menu attributes: height, labeled -->
         <Program icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/filesystems/desktop.png" label="Desktop menu"></Program>
      <Separator/>
      <Program label="Terminal" icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/apps/terminal.png">xterm</Program>
      <Program label="File Manager" icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/apps/file-manager.png">xfe</Program>
      <Program label="Web Browser" icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/apps/browser.png">opera</Program>
      <Separator/>
      <Menu label="Games" icon="/usr/share/icons/ROX-nuvola/apps/package_games.png">
             <Program label="xgalaga" icon="/usr/share/chromium/data/png/hero.png">xgalaga</Program>
           </Menu>
      <Menu icon="/usr/share/icons/ROX-nuvola/apps/package_graphics.png" label="Graphics">
         <Program icon="/usr/share/pixmaps/xpaint.png" label="mtpaint">mtpaint</Program>
      </Menu>
      <Menu icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/apps/package_multimedia.png" label="Multimedia">
         <Program icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/apps/xmms.png" label="XMMS">xmms</Program>         
         <Program icon="/usr/share/x264/x264.png" label="X264">x264_gtk_encode</Program>
      </Menu>
      <Menu icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/apps/network.png" label="Network">
         <Program icon="/usr/share/pixmaps/dillo.png" label="Dillo">dillo</Program>
         <Program icon="/usr/share/icons/opera_48x48.png" label="Opera">opera</Program>
<Program icon="/usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps/pidgin.png" label="Pidgin">pidgin</Program>
         <Program label="VLSamba mount" icon="/usr/share/icons/ROX-nuvola/apps/samba.png">/sbin/vlsmbmnt</Program>
<Program icon="wifi-radar.png" label="vwifi">/sbin/vsuper "/sbin/vwifi"</Program>
      </Menu>
      <Menu icon="/usr/share/icons/ROX-nuvola/apps/package_office.png" label="Office">
      </Menu>
      <Menu icon="/usr/share/icons/ROX-nuvola/apps/package_system.png" label="System">
<Program icon="/usr/share/pixmaps/gslapt.png" label="GSlapt Package Manager">/sbin/vsuper "/usr/sbin/gslapt"</Program>
         <Program icon="htop.png" label="htop">xterm -bg black -fg white htop</Program>
         <Program icon="" label="Edit JWM">xterm -e 'mcedit ~/.jwmrc'</Program>
         <Program icon="/usr/share/hardinfo/pixmaps/logo.png" label="System Profiler and Benchmark">hardinfo</Program>
         <Program label="Terminal" icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/apps/terminal.png">xterm</Program>
         <Program label="Terminal [root]" icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/apps/terminal.png">/sbin/vsuper "xterm"</Program>
      <Program icon="/usr/share/icons/ROX-nuvola/apps/vasm.png" label="VASM">/sbin/vasm</Program>
<Program icon="/usr/share/icons/Rodent/48x48/misc/firewall.png" label="VLeasytables">/sbin/vsuper "vleasytables"</Program>
       </Menu>
      <Separator/>
      <Menu label="Quit">
          <Restart label="Restart JWM" icon="restart.png"/>
          <Exit label="Log Out" confirm="false" icon="exit.png"/>
          <Program label="Reboot">sudo /sbin/shutdown -t3 -r now</Program>
          <Program label="Shutdown">sudo /sbin/shutdown -t3 -h now</Program>
      </Menu>
   </RootMenu>
   <Group>
      <Class>Pidgin</Class>
      <Option>sticky</Option>
   </Group>

   <Group>
      <Name>gkrellm2</Name>
      <Option>nolist</Option>
   </Group>

   <Group>
      <Name>rxvt</Name>
      <Option>vmax</Option>
   </Group>

   <!-- Additional tray attributes: autohide, width, border, layer, layout -->
   <Tray  x="0" y="-1" height="32">

    <!-- Additional TrayButton attribute: label -->
        <TrayButton label="Start" icon="/usr/share/icons/ROX-nuvola/apps/vector.png">root:1</TrayButton>

      <TrayButton label="" icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/filesystems/desktop.png">showdesktop</TrayButton>


      <!-- Additional Pager attributes; width, height -->
      <Pager/>

      <!-- Additional TaskList attribute: maxwidth -->
      <TaskList/>

      <Dock/>

      <!-- Additional Swallow attribute: height -->
      <Swallow name="xload" width="64">
         xload -nolabel -bg black -fg red -hl white
      </Swallow>

      <Clock>xclock</Clock>

   </Tray>

   <!-- Visual Styles -->

   <WindowStyle>

      <Font>FreeSans-9:bold</Font>
      <Width>4</Width>
      <Height>20</Height>

      <Active>
         <Text>white</Text>
         <Title>#70849d:#2e3a67</Title>
         <Corner>white</Corner>
         <Outline>black</Outline>
      </Active>

      <Inactive>
         <Text>#aaaaaa</Text>
         <Title>#808488:#303438</Title>
         <Corner>#aaaaaa</Corner>
         <Outline>black</Outline>
      </Inactive>

   </WindowStyle>

   <TaskListStyle>
      <Font>FreeSans-12</Font>
      <ActiveForeground>black</ActiveForeground>
      <ActiveBackground>gray90:gray70</ActiveBackground>
      <Foreground>black</Foreground>
      <Background>gray70:gray90</Background>
   </TaskListStyle>

   <!-- Additional TrayStyle attribute: insert -->
   <TrayStyle>
      <Font>FreeSans-12</Font>
      <Background>gray90</Background>
      <Foreground>black</Foreground>
   </TrayStyle>

   <PagerStyle>
      <Outline>black</Outline>
      <Foreground>gray90</Foreground>
      <Background>#808488</Background>
      <ActiveForeground>#70849d</ActiveForeground>
      <ActiveBackground>#2e3a67</ActiveBackground>
   </PagerStyle>

   <MenuStyle>
      <Font>FreeSans-10</Font>
      <Foreground>black</Foreground>
      <Background>gray90</Background>
      <ActiveForeground>white</ActiveForeground>
      <ActiveBackground>#70849d:#2e3a67</ActiveBackground>
   </MenuStyle>

   <PopupStyle>
      <Font>FreeSans-10</Font>
      <Outline>black</Outline>
      <Foreground>black</Foreground>
      <Background>yellow</Background>
   </PopupStyle>

   <IconPath>/usr/share/pixmaps</IconPath>

   <StartupCommand>
      if test x"$DBUS_SESSION_BUS_ADDRESS" = x""; then
         dbuslaunch=`which dbus-launch`
         if test x"$dbuslaunch" != x"" -a x"$dbuslaunch" != x"no"; then
            eval `$dbuslaunch --sh-syntax --exit-with-session`
         fi
      fi
      xfce-mcs-manager
      #xfdesktop
   </StartupCommand>

   <!-- Virtual Desktops -->
   <!-- Desktop tags can be contained within Desktops for desktop names. -->
   <Desktops count="2">
   </Desktops>

   <!-- Double click speed (in milliseconds) -->
   <DoubleClickSpeed>400</DoubleClickSpeed>

   <!-- Double click delta (in pixels) -->
   <DoubleClickDelta>2</DoubleClickDelta>

   <!-- The focus model (sloppy or click) -->
   <FocusModel>click</FocusModel>

   <!-- The snap mode (none, screen, or border) -->
   <SnapMode distance="10">border</SnapMode>

   <!-- The move mode (outline or opaque) -->
   <MoveMode>opaque</MoveMode>

   <!-- The resize mode (outline or opaque) -->
   <ResizeMode>opaque</ResizeMode>

   <!-- Key bindings -->
   <Key key="Up">up</Key>
   <Key key="Down">down</Key>
   <Key key="Right">right</Key>
   <Key key="Left">left</Key>
   <Key key="h">left</Key>
   <Key key="j">down</Key>
   <Key key="k">up</Key>
   <Key key="l">right</Key>
   <Key key="Return">select</Key>
   <Key key="Escape">escape</Key>

   <Key mask="A" key="Tab">nextstacked</Key>
   <Key mask="A" key="F4">close</Key>
   <Key mask="A" key="#">desktop#</Key>
   <Key mask="A" key="F1">root:1</Key>
   <Key mask="A" key="F2">window</Key>

</JWM>
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: GrannyGeek on January 18, 2008, 07:07:37 pm
upgraded opera to 9.50b1 its the only one i could get to do flash

If you use Opera 9.25 (current non-beta version), you can get Flash by using Flash 7 that can be downloaded from http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/get/flashplayer/installers/archive/fp7_archive.zip. Unzip it and select the directory with the Flash 7 Linux player. Then copy libflashplayer.so and flashplayer.xpt into /usr/lib/opera/plugins. Make libflashplayer.so executable. In Opera's Tools menu, Preferences, Advanced, Downloads edit swf and any other Flash files to use the plugin in Opera's plugin directory.

Flash 7 works fine with Opera prior to 9.50b1. I don't install the Opera beta that comes with 5.9 Standard because it changes the e-mail format and makes it incompatible with the non-beta Opera. Since I share my Opera mail files with Windows, I don't want this to happen because I don't want to install the Opera beta on all my systems. I couldn't get Flash in Opera in VL5.9 because the Flash that comes with VL 5.9 is too new for Opera 9.25 and doesn't work. Since I've installed the Flash 7 plugin in Opera 9.25 Flash is working fine.
--GrannyGeek
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: GrannyGeek on January 18, 2008, 07:29:57 pm
As I read through these messages and suggested inclusions, I keep wondering what the target market is for VL Light. First there was talk about people with really old computers (too weak for 5.9 Standard) and slow Internet connections that made a smaller ISO desirable. Then I saw talk about developers who would be attracted to VL through this Light version (though I can't imagine why the Light version would do it but Standard and SOHO wouldn't). The programs mentioned for inclusion do not seem to me to be the type that would appeal to a user with an antique computer. I assume that such a user would not be into computers very deeply--sort of like Uncle Mike who got a computer in 1994 and hasn't gone for anything newer. So for that type of user, these geeky command line programs no "normal" user ever heard of are not going to have much appeal.

And I can't imagine a body of potential developers hanging onto their antique hardware with dialup and thus being interested in developing VL-Light. There is a limit to how antique anyone who really cares about computing is willing to be.

So who is this VL-Light geared to? Will a "normal" user who is hardware-challenged really want Flash-less browsers, no icons, a very unWindows-like desktop, etc., etc.? I don't want to sound unkind, but what I'm seeing now is a group of geeks creating a minimalist distro with their favorite minimalist apps. It's like "VL Standard isn't lean enough for me. Let's see how lean we can make it." And I'm not using "geek" as an insult term--not at all.

Also, if the ISO is so small because you're worried about download time for these hardware-challenged users, how are they going to get all the stuff that's missing onto their computers? Will they want to be downloading all this stuff from the repos? I don't see that you save them much with a 300-meg ISO if they have to download another 200 megs to get what they want that's not in the ISO.
--GrannyGeek
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: exeterdad on January 18, 2008, 07:53:15 pm
Good points GrannyGeek, all of them.  But once again all of us are different.  My take on the Lite version is getting a slender but useful install.  Then if the user would like, they may cherrypick the apps that they prefer, creating a perfect install with low overhead.  Time and time again we have users pleading for a smaller sized iso for whatever reason.  Now VL is attempting to deliver.  Even as a smaller product, it may be useful for many categories of users.  Many users feel even Standard is bloated.  And it is if you step back and look at it.  It caters quite a lot to the majority.  But in the end, we have many apps installed by default that are never executed.

And besides...  with a smaller development effort, it's another spark of activity for us on DW.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: uelsk8s on January 18, 2008, 11:31:24 pm
Quote
siag or pw:
Warning: Cannot convert string "-*-helvetica-medium-r-*-*-12-*-*-*-*-*-iso8859-*" to type FontStruct
Panic: can't load any fonts!
slapt-get --install font-adobe-100dpi
fixes this so you can give siag and pw a try
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: uelsk8s on January 20, 2008, 10:26:31 pm
1.4 is up: http://vectorlinux.osuosl.org/Uelsk8s/iso-test/VL5.9-Light-A1.4.iso 324mb
delta here: http://vectorlinux.osuosl.org/Uelsk8s/iso-test/VL5.9-Light-A1.3to1.4.delta 169mb

Changes:
A1.4-Jan-20-2008
Added xdmtheme-vl
Added freetype
Added jwm & flux menu's   
Added xorg drivers
Added helvetica font   
Upgraded gtk+2-2.10.14
Added idesk test package

From here I need anyone who wants to have a say in the apps that will be in this to install the ISO, try the apps already there, download any they think should be there from gslapt, and post back here their findings.
I need people to try siag and pw and tell us what they think.
install abiword and deps to get it running and tell us how it does and how much (in MB) they had tro download to get it working.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 22, 2008, 08:44:00 am
Edit: starting over with respect to Abiword:
I had to install the following packages to get it working:
gucharmap (1 M)
libgnomeprint (394 K)
libbnomeprintui (303 K)
wv (267 K)

Including Abiword itself (2.4 M), that adds up to less than 5 MB total downloads.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 22, 2008, 09:03:51 am
Siag Office: Loads and runs very fast. It has some interesting integrated apps like xedplus and xfiler. Other entries like calculator and egon don't do anything.

Personally, I find the suite early -90's looking and rather confusing. The keyboard shortcuts I'm used to do not work. Edit/copy/paste is hit and miss. Many fonts look and behave weird to the point where they are unusable.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 22, 2008, 09:31:59 am
idesk: I had to create an icon file (/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/apps/home.png) before it would load. Now it puts an icon on the desktop that loads the home dir in xfe.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 22, 2008, 10:13:28 am
idesk: I had to create an icon file (/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/apps/home.png) before it would load. Now it puts an icon on the desktop that loads the home dir in xfe.
is this good or bad?
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 22, 2008, 10:36:42 am
It's good. Shows that the program works when all the pieces are in place.

I guess I sometimes tend to post brief messages with my observations without explaining further or drawing conclusions. Living in my own little world..  :P
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 22, 2008, 11:59:55 am
Added Gnumeric (8 M download) It installed and runs without any errors.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 22, 2008, 12:03:11 pm
I think flux / jwm + idesk is the best light desktop I've seen.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 22, 2008, 12:24:23 pm
Siag/PW: If I change to "nv" for my video driver, the error about the missing fonts returns. They work when using vesa.

After playing around with them some, in their current state I find them unsuitable for this project. Even a light distro needs some minimum visual appeal and functionality.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 22, 2008, 01:36:04 pm
I think flux / jwm + idesk is the best light desktop I've seen.

It does look good. JWM without any background seems to be slightly lighter, but it looks like Fluxbox has more and better features including auto-generation of menu items.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 22, 2008, 01:40:05 pm
I like jwm, execept for remove (vnc) sessions. if you ever run it on vnc sessions, the panel and window borders turn pink. I dont know what causes that or how to fix it.

I'm not a big fan of fluxbox's but, it'll be fine with idesk I guess.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 22, 2008, 04:05:29 pm
First attempt to install VL 1.4 Light to hard drive:
Code: [Select]
Boot from CD:
L 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99
99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99
99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99
99 99 99 99 99 99 99 ...
I changed boot order to boot from HD first, but this output recurred. I am reading that this output indicates a problem with MBR.

Noted during installation: Modem not detected (SmartLink winmodem). Incidentally, modem is detected by Puppy 2.17.1.

I have declined to download or install several distros that had MPlayer as default media player, eg. Mepis AntiX.

EDIT: Oops, AntiX uses Xine. Maybe I was thinking of Absolute. I wound up being stuck with MPlayer in Debian Etch (stable) because Debian's xine engine is old ancient, version 1.1.2.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 22, 2008, 06:08:56 pm
I hooked up another hard drive, and this time I got to Desktop. I inserted a USB thumb drive, nothing happened, so I guess I must get HAL or VL-Hot.

I installed xine-ui and xine-lib with Gslapt, but xine does not appear in Multimedia menu. What must I do to get xine in the Multimedia section?

Same for VLC. Also, VLC has a misplaced volume adjust feature. The speaker icon + volume adjust are superimposed over a button, just under "Navigation".

I tried abiword from terminal, it seems that libgucharmap.so.6 is missing. That lib is not available from Gslapt with testing and patches enabled. EDIT: Abiword working now, following advice of nightflier.

I cannot use the login dialog (xdm?) to change from JWM to Fluxbox. Some problems with the cursor (stuck), once cursor is in password field.

Having trouble with VL Forum session verification. Must log out and log in each time I bring Opera browser to this site.

In VL 5.9 Std, there is a Run dialog from V-menu. When an app is started from this Run dialog, there is only an instance of the desired app. However, when the app is started from terminal, the terminal must be present for the app to continue. So if there were a Run dialog from Start in JWM, then an instance of terminal wouldn't be required in addition to the app.

Ach! I can't believe we're using K3b in Fluxbox.

In Fluxbox, gmplayer is missing openal library.

VLC not playing a .FLV from "Open with" dialog (in JWM). Xine plays .FLV passably, good AV sync.

I suggest we drop K3b from VL Lite. MyBashBurn or Grafburn would be much more suitable to a project like this.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: uelsk8s on January 22, 2008, 06:54:04 pm
vl-hot is there, but there is not a way for it to setup icons on th e desktop.
navigate to /mnt/vl-hot and you thumb drive should be there.

in jwm you will have to hand edit the ~/.jwmrc and add xine

from xdm try typing username and password then instead of enter press F1

I am thinking we should go back to opera 9.25 and use flash 7 for this.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 22, 2008, 07:16:44 pm
I am thinking we should go back to opera 9.25 and use flash 7 for this.

The current beta version is working well for me so far. It can't be very far from going stable. I would prefer to keep this one and Flash 9 unless someone find problems with them.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 22, 2008, 08:07:28 pm
I dont know if the devs have spent more time in JWM, and just not had the time to configure and flesh out Fluxbox, but as things are now, it appears that JWM is more configurable and customizable. For example, I don't see VL's custom config tools in Fluxbox. (Is Fluxbox going to be more difficult to brand as VL?) As long as we are making a minimalistic version, I suggest we just focus on a single WM, and that should probably be JWM. It seems like a lotta redundant effort to be setting up two WMs which do about the same thing. If I was gonna choose a second WM, it would probably be IceWM, not Fluxbox.

Our time is limited, so I say we focus on a single WM, yet there is still plenty to do, getting things to work right.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 23, 2008, 06:37:05 am
Menu: It is about the same effort to customize in either wm. I would not mind doing both as soon as the list of included apps is finalized.

From what I can tell, only Fluxbox comes with a script that automatically searches your system for apps and creates a menu. It would make it easier for users to update after adding programs. On the negative side, the script adds stuff you may not want and also wipes out most customizations. I will do some more research on it.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 23, 2008, 06:59:01 am
a gentle reminder: We are designing this version to be as small as possible. Just because there is plenty of room left on an install CD doesn't mean we can waste space on a second WM. If we want to compare two competing WMs for the best possible solution, that is one thing, but to have two WMs in the final version is unnecessary, and counter to our objectives, ie. to minimize the download for users with limited internet access, to minimize hdd space required for installation.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 23, 2008, 07:17:48 am
Size-wise, JWM is hands down the winner. The package is less than 100 K, and only a couple hundred installed. It will be included in any case. In comparison, the Fluxbox package is between 7 and 8 MB, and around 10 MB installed.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 23, 2008, 07:31:38 am
Currently, what is installed size of VL-Lite? I see 205 MB with a couple of my favorite apps installed. So 10MB for Fluxbox represents 5% total, that's not so bad. But why do we confuse user with more choices? I think I prefer JWM from a usability standpoint, that is, it seems more conventional and easier to use. Furthermore, I think JWM and Fluxbox do about the same thing, hence, my criticism that two WMs would be redundant.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: easuter on January 23, 2008, 08:04:09 am
Shouldn't we be working towards a target size?
Otherwise this Light version can just grow and grow until its almost like Standard.

Hm... IIRC VL 5.1 Standard was about 350MB right?...
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 23, 2008, 08:05:43 am
That is correct... The idea is to keep it small, freakin fast and provide basic useful software
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 23, 2008, 09:24:03 am
Space usage: /usr/share/pixmaps and /usr/share/icons hold over 10 MB of images. It looks like many of those can be weeded out. How about we decide on one location and include only the icons actually used by the menu and desktop icons? There could be an optional package for those who want it all.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 23, 2008, 11:35:51 am
I made another config file for JWM which has a "Run" entry and a few more additions. Paste this into your ~/.jwmrc file to see the results.

Code: [Select]
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!-- This file controls the behavior of JWM. Edit with care! -->

<JWM>

    <!-- The root menu, if this is undefined you will not get a menu. -->
   <!-- Additional RootMenu attributes: onroot, labeled, label -->
   <RootMenu height="20">
      <!-- Addititional Menu attributes: height, labeled -->
         <Program icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/filesystems/desktop.png" label="Desktop menu"></Program>
      <Separator/>
      <Program label=" Run.. " icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/filesystems/computer.png">fbrun</Program>
      <Program label=" Terminal" icon="/usr/share/pixmaps/gksu-terminal.png">xterm</Program>
      <Program label=" File Manager" icon="/usr/share/xfe/icons/xfe-theme/xfe.png">xfe</Program>
      <Program label=" Web Browser" icon="/usr/share/pixmaps/opera.xpm">opera</Program>
      <Program label=" Text Editor" icon="/usr/share/xfe/icons/xfe-theme/xfw.png">xfw</Program>
      <Separator/>
      <Menu label="Games" icon="/usr/share/icons/ROX-nuvola/apps/package_games.png">
             <Program label="xgalaga" icon="/usr/share/pixmaps/xgalaga.png">xgalaga</Program>
           </Menu>
      <Menu label="Graphics" icon="/usr/share/icons/ROX-nuvola/apps/package_graphics.png">
         <Program label="mtpaint" icon="/usr/share/pixmaps/xpaint.png">mtpaint</Program>
      </Menu>
      <Menu label="Multimedia" icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/apps/package_multimedia.png">
         <Program label="XMMS" icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/mimetypes/sound.png">xmms</Program>         
         <Program label="X264 Encoder" icon="">x264_gtk_encode</Program>
      </Menu>
      <Menu icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/apps/network.png" label="Network">
         <Program label="Dillo" icon="/usr/share/pixmaps/dillo.png">dillo</Program>
         <Program label="Opera" icon="/usr/share/icons/opera_48x48.png">opera</Program>
<Program label="Pidgin" icon="/usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps/pidgin.png">pidgin</Program>
         <Program label="VLSamba mount" icon="/usr/share/icons/ROX-nuvola/apps/samba.png">/sbin/vlsmbmnt</Program>
<Program label="vwifi" icon="wifi-radar.png">/sbin/vsuper "/sbin/vwifi"</Program>
      </Menu>
      <Menu label="Office" icon="/usr/share/icons/ROX-nuvola/apps/package_office.png">
      </Menu>
      <Menu label="System" icon="/usr/share/icons/ROX-nuvola/apps/package_system.png">
<Program label="GSlapt Package Manager" icon="/usr/share/pixmaps/gslapt.png">/sbin/vsuper "/usr/sbin/gslapt"</Program>
         <Program label="htop" icon="htop.png">xterm -bg black -fg white htop</Program>
         <Program label="Edit JWM" icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/filesystems/gnome-fs-executable.png">xfw ~/.jwmrc</Program>
         <Program label="System Profiler and Benchmark" icon="/usr/share/hardinfo/pixmaps/logo.png">hardinfo</Program>
         <Program label="Terminal" icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/apps/terminal.png">xterm</Program>
         <Program label="Terminal [root]" icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/apps/terminal.png">/sbin/vsuper "xterm"</Program>
      <Program label="VASM" icon="/usr/share/icons/ROX-nuvola/apps/vasm.png">/sbin/vasm</Program>
<Program label="VLeasytables" icon="/usr/share/icons/Rodent/48x48/misc/firewall.png">/sbin/vsuper "vleasytables"</Program>
       </Menu>
      <Separator/>
      <Menu label="Quit">
          <Restart label="Restart JWM" icon="restart.png"/>
          <Exit label="Log Out" confirm="false" icon="exit.png"/>
          <Program label="Reboot">sudo /sbin/shutdown -t3 -r now</Program>
          <Program label="Shutdown">sudo /sbin/shutdown -t3 -h now</Program>
      </Menu>
   </RootMenu>
   <Group>
      <Class>Pidgin</Class>
      <Option>sticky</Option>
   </Group>

   <Group>
      <Name>gkrellm2</Name>
      <Option>nolist</Option>
   </Group>

   <Group>
      <Name>rxvt</Name>
      <Option>vmax</Option>
   </Group>

   <!-- Additional tray attributes: autohide, width, border, layer, layout -->
   <Tray  x="0" y="-1" height="32">

    <!-- Additional TrayButton attribute: label -->
        <TrayButton label="Start" icon="/usr/share/icons/ROX-nuvola/apps/vector.png">root:1</TrayButton>

      <TrayButton label="" icon="/usr/share/icons/Vista-Inspirate/scalable/filesystems/desktop.png">showdesktop</TrayButton>


      <!-- Additional Pager attributes; width, height -->
      <Pager/>

      <!-- Additional TaskList attribute: maxwidth -->
      <TaskList/>

      <Dock/>

      <!-- Additional Swallow attribute: height -->
      <Swallow name="xload" width="64">
         xload -nolabel -bg black -fg red -hl white
      </Swallow>

      <Clock>xclock</Clock>

   </Tray>

   <!-- Visual Styles -->

   <WindowStyle>

      <Font>FreeSans-9:bold</Font>
      <Width>4</Width>
      <Height>20</Height>

      <Active>
         <Text>white</Text>
         <Title>#70849d:#2e3a67</Title>
         <Corner>white</Corner>
         <Outline>black</Outline>
      </Active>

      <Inactive>
         <Text>#aaaaaa</Text>
         <Title>#808488:#303438</Title>
         <Corner>#aaaaaa</Corner>
         <Outline>black</Outline>
      </Inactive>

   </WindowStyle>

   <TaskListStyle>
      <Font>FreeSans-12</Font>
      <ActiveForeground>black</ActiveForeground>
      <ActiveBackground>gray90:gray70</ActiveBackground>
      <Foreground>black</Foreground>
      <Background>gray70:gray90</Background>
   </TaskListStyle>

   <!-- Additional TrayStyle attribute: insert -->
   <TrayStyle>
      <Font>FreeSans-12</Font>
      <Background>gray90</Background>
      <Foreground>black</Foreground>
   </TrayStyle>

   <PagerStyle>
      <Outline>black</Outline>
      <Foreground>gray90</Foreground>
      <Background>#808488</Background>
      <ActiveForeground>#70849d</ActiveForeground>
      <ActiveBackground>#2e3a67</ActiveBackground>
   </PagerStyle>

   <MenuStyle>
      <Font>FreeSans-10</Font>
      <Foreground>black</Foreground>
      <Background>gray90</Background>
      <ActiveForeground>white</ActiveForeground>
      <ActiveBackground>#70849d:#2e3a67</ActiveBackground>
   </MenuStyle>

   <PopupStyle>
      <Font>FreeSans-10</Font>
      <Outline>black</Outline>
      <Foreground>black</Foreground>
      <Background>yellow</Background>
   </PopupStyle>

   <IconPath>/usr/share/pixmaps</IconPath>

   <StartupCommand>
      if test x"$DBUS_SESSION_BUS_ADDRESS" = x""; then
         dbuslaunch=`which dbus-launch`
         if test x"$dbuslaunch" != x"" -a x"$dbuslaunch" != x"no"; then
            eval `$dbuslaunch --sh-syntax --exit-with-session`
         fi
      fi
      #xfdesktop
   </StartupCommand>

   <!-- Virtual Desktops -->
   <!-- Desktop tags can be contained within Desktops for desktop names. -->
   <Desktops count="2">
   </Desktops>

   <!-- Double click speed (in milliseconds) -->
   <DoubleClickSpeed>400</DoubleClickSpeed>

   <!-- Double click delta (in pixels) -->
   <DoubleClickDelta>2</DoubleClickDelta>

   <!-- The focus model (sloppy or click) -->
   <FocusModel>click</FocusModel>

   <!-- The snap mode (none, screen, or border) -->
   <SnapMode distance="10">border</SnapMode>

   <!-- The move mode (outline or opaque) -->
   <MoveMode>opaque</MoveMode>

   <!-- The resize mode (outline or opaque) -->
   <ResizeMode>opaque</ResizeMode>

   <!-- Key bindings -->
   <Key key="Up">up</Key>
   <Key key="Down">down</Key>
   <Key key="Right">right</Key>
   <Key key="Left">left</Key>
   <Key key="h">left</Key>
   <Key key="j">down</Key>
   <Key key="k">up</Key>
   <Key key="l">right</Key>
   <Key key="Return">select</Key>
   <Key key="Escape">escape</Key>

   <Key mask="A" key="Tab">nextstacked</Key>
   <Key mask="A" key="F4">close</Key>
   <Key mask="A" key="#">desktop#</Key>
   <Key mask="A" key="F1">root:1</Key>
   <Key mask="A" key="F2">window</Key>

</JWM>
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 23, 2008, 11:45:51 am
can we put a set of desktop icons together and have it start idesk automatically?
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 23, 2008, 01:04:35 pm
As it is right now, idesk won't start without manual tweaking. I have some launcers made that I'll propose for next release.

To make it launch automatically, just search for "#xfdesktop" in the above .jwmrc file and replace that with "idesk".
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: uelsk8s on January 23, 2008, 01:07:06 pm
VL-5.1 STD was 390MB
we are shooting for a final size not to exceed 350MB
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 23, 2008, 06:47:46 pm
Slackware-based GoblinX has two small versions, Micro (102mb) and Mini (158mb).

The GoblinX Mini Edition is the son of GoblinX and contains only XFCE as windows manager and GTK/GTK2 based applications. The Mini Edition contains some of the most often used and praised applications for Linux, even though it has less than one hundred and fifty megabytes of size. Some of these best Linux applications included are: Abiword, Firefox, Pidgin Gcalctool, Totem, Gimp, Gnumeric, Hardinfo, Audacious, GStreamer, Brasero, Sylpheed, Evince and more.
Main upgrades since release 2.5:
Upgraded Xorg and several other packages. Upgraded Xfce to the new 4.4.2 release. Upgraded several scripts and interfaces. Corrected some bugs. Compiz and Mesa are included in a separeted module. Removed Sylpheed and Beryl.
This is the first release candidate.
http://www.goblinx.com.br/en/index_mini.htm
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

The GoblinX Micro Edition is the smallest version of our distribution and contains only Fluxbox as windows manager and GTK/GTK2 based applications. The edition is indicated for those users whose like to do fast tests, know more about Fluxbox and rebuild the livecd.
The Micro is created mostly to help us to develop better and small applications that can be used for all small windows managers such as Fluxbox, and also prepare the livecd without all less necessary files we can find. We also intend to use it to test Web2 and/or Ajax applications.
Main upgrades since release candidate rc01 edition:
Added Slax(Tomas) firewall. Added more options to Isolinux menu. Rebuilt Gtkdialog interfaces to not allow resize action. Corrected few errors and bugs. Corrected Kill button in media manager interfaces. Added Ghdcpd and Xrefresh. Upgraded some libraries and packages including Xorg-server. Changed z.Goblix for z.Micro, a different GoblinX module for Micro edition. Changed z.User for z.Muser, a different User settings module for Micro edition. Corrected some Sudo issues. Removed Xorg default resolution. Recompiled Fluxbox  against Imlib2.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 23, 2008, 07:53:31 pm
How do I get Geany? I'm trying to paste nightflier's JWM config file to /.jwmrc, but I dont think I will be able to use mc editor without assistance. So if someone could give me a little assist, would be appreciated. I need specific instructions for the copy and paste operation.

Using the mc editor reminds me of trying to use Hewlett Packard calculators, the ones with no "equals" button.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: lagagnon on January 23, 2008, 09:30:11 pm
I think there is an old 5.8 package for Geany that should work fine under 5.9 - its in the 5.8 reps. You might want to try "medit", supplied with 5.9, it's a lot easier to use than mcedit. The only great thing about mcedit is that it ties in well with mc.

Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 24, 2008, 05:00:07 am
How do I get Geany? I'm trying to paste nightflier's JWM config file to /.jwmrc, but I dont think I will be able to use mc editor without assistance. So if someone could give me a little assist, would be appreciated. I need specific instructions for the copy and paste operation.

Using the mc editor reminds me of trying to use Hewlett Packard calculators, the ones with no "equals" button.

Try using xfw
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 24, 2008, 08:33:51 am
In jwm, I have found that on initial launch of xfe, xvi or xfw, the title bar may be off the top of the screen and not reachable with the mouse. Correct this by right-clicking on the panel entry for the window, select "move" and dragging the window down. On subsequent launches they position themselves correctly.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M-ake on January 25, 2008, 01:31:24 pm
Just making VL-lite concept art
(http://xs223.xs.to/xs223/08045/bootsplash_concept_art552.jpg.xs.jpg) (http://xs.to/xs.php?h=xs223&d=08045&f=bootsplash_concept_art552.jpg)
Will be available later as 1280x1024 && 1280x800 wallpaper version if needed. (:
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: M0E-lnx on January 25, 2008, 01:44:17 pm
WoW!... that looks fantastic!...
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: exeterdad on January 25, 2008, 01:46:08 pm
Just making VL-lite concept art
(http://xs223.xs.to/xs223/08045/bootsplash_concept_art552.jpg.xs.jpg) (http://xs.to/xs.php?h=xs223&d=08045&f=bootsplash_concept_art552.jpg)
Will be available later as 1280x1024 && 1280x800 wallpaper version if needed. (:

* Jaw hits keyboard *
That is gorgeous!
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: easuter on January 25, 2008, 02:52:30 pm
Thats a kick-ass wallpaper.

Just... its light, not lite. ;)
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: gamfa on January 25, 2008, 05:05:12 pm
Ever since this started up I had hopes a lite version would be somewhat like Kocil's first Dynamite for 5.0. Just the basics and the user could make it what he/she wanted from the repositories.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 25, 2008, 05:42:28 pm
Quote
Just... its light, not lite.
"Lite version, a basic, no-frills version of a product, especially computer software."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lite
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: easuter on January 25, 2008, 06:05:33 pm
Quote
"Lite version, a basic, no-frills version of a product, especially computer software."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lite


Yeah, like color instead of colour; thru instead of through; etc  ::)
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: exeterdad on January 25, 2008, 06:28:04 pm
Although the link defining Lite Version, the first word especially....  Is quite disturbing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lite_version

Crippleware?
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: uelsk8s on January 25, 2008, 06:32:50 pm
I like this much better myself.
light (comparative lighter, superlative lightest)

   1. Of low weight; not heavy.

   2. Lightly-built; designed for speed or small loads.


Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 25, 2008, 06:39:08 pm
Ya, apparently the usage of Lite tends to refer to crippleware, or an intentionally deficient product. I didnt know that. I guess the world of advertising races ahead of common knowledge.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: easuter on January 25, 2008, 06:45:01 pm
Although the link defining Lite Version, the first word especially....  Is quite disturbing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lite_version

Crippleware?

Good catch!  :o
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: caitlyn on January 26, 2008, 11:02:33 am
I've been working on-and-off with another developer on a project based on VL.  It was originally going to be VL-mini but for reasons that are irrelevant to this thread it's going to end up being a completely separate distro loosely based on VL -- as in some bits will come from Vector but others (including the kernel) will not.  Just trimming down Vector to our specs was a huge job and building from scratch proved easier.

In any case, if VL were to meet our requirements we'd drop our project in half a heartbeat :)  I do like VL.  Here's what we came up with so far for both green computing (Nano-ITX, Pico-ITX technology and Asus Eee PC) and older systems:

1.  Choice of traditional install or hosted install (i.e.: vinstall or similar for machines which don't support or don't have a bootable CD-ROM drive or USB Boot support).  A live CD (separate) is also necessary.
2.  Footprint under 1.0GB.  Fits on a 5cm (3") mini CD so iso must be <210MB.  Dev tools not included but can be installed en masse from a metapackage in a repository.  Ditto docs including man pages.  Ditto i18n/i10n files.
3.  Must run in 64MB of RAM with X. (OK if some heavier apps are available or even on the iso, but the core apps and UI must perform reasonably well with little memory.) A 32MB ultralight mode would be nice too but not critical.  X support must be excellent for both older and newer hardware.  It should be noted that this restriction doesn't apply to the live CD -- linux-live scripts really do need 96MB and I haven't found a decent alternative yet.
4.  Live CD must support copy2ram and do it successfully in <= 512MB RAM.  It'd be nice to include that in the traditional install as well.  We haven't figured that bit out yet.
5.  Our (still not public) alpha has two window managers:  jwm and pekwm.  We've played with fluxbox but found it a little slow on 64MB systems.  The ones we chose are happy in 32MB.  We added fbpanel to pekwm to add a reasonable panel and use Esetroot to add a background image.  Other window managers that performed acceptably included aewm++, windowmaker, fvwm2, ion, and afterstep.  Ion was rejected due to licensing concerns.  Using dfm to add icons to the desktop was considered and then ditched.  Many old systems or systems with tiny screens run at relatively low resolution.  Clutter is NOT a good thing.
6.  Apps in our alpha include abiword and gnumeric.  They run acceptably well in 32MB so we ditched SIAG Office but it is a reasonable alternative.  File managers that work well enough include emelfm and xfe. 
7.  Our chosen terminal is mrxvt -- tabbed but lightweight enough.  rxvt-unicode is another good choice.  aterm works well enough too.
8.  Believe it or not GIMP is usable (OK, just barely) at 64MB.  xv is the lightweight (but limited) alternative.
9.  Firefox is NOT usable at 64MB of RAM.  Opera is.  We wanted all Open Source but reality forced us in a different direction.  Opera is also smaller than Firefox.  Dillo is the lightweight alternative.
10.  Don't even think about Flash, Java, or other fancy shmancy plugins.  Optional and in the repository - yes.  On the iso -- no chance.
11.  Have some decent multimedia options for machines with more RAM.  Mplayer and either xmms or bmp are good, basic choices.
12.  CD burning -- grafburn seems like the best choice at present.  I hate using anything from Puppy Linux because of their community but there you have it.
13.  Most reasonable text editors are light enough.  Bluefish is fine in 32MB of RAM for HTML/PHP.  Leafpad runs on anything.
14.  Ya gotta have vi and/or nano.  AliXe went with just mcedit for a command line editor and I hate it.
15.  Asus Eee PC is a special animal all it's own and probably is a separate release.

These are just random thoughts, really, but you get the idea...

-C
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 26, 2008, 05:32:25 pm
Pcmanfm just released version 0.3.5.4 today. Glad to see that promising project going forward.  :)
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 27, 2008, 11:52:04 am
Installed Alpha 1.6 on a P3-600 with 60 MB Ram (4 is taken by the on-board video). Set it up to use pcmanfm to show desktop icons as well as wallpaper. Immediately after cold boot, htop shows 20 MB of RAM plus 2 MB swap usage. All the included apps, including Opera, are quite usable. I find this very encouraging.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: exeterdad on January 27, 2008, 01:11:08 pm
Wow.  That's impressive!
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 28, 2008, 06:45:57 pm
As long as VL Light targets low-end computers, I think we should make an effort to improve modem detection, even go so far as auto-configuration. As it is now, my Lucent winmodem is not detected. I'm not saying this has to be done for this first edition, but I think that after initial development, we should try to make those improvements for the many users with dialup.

I would like to retain System Profiler and Benchmark in VL Light. This utility is bound to improve and it's useful now.

I'm not trying to stir things up, but most minimalistic versions are live CDs as well. How much extra stuff would be required to make VL Light a live CD? I'm just curious.

Login dialog became inoperable when I selected "Start Fluxbox". In Fluxbox, I tried to call movie player from desktop icon and start menu, with negative results, nothing came up. Is Fluxbox still being developed?

Drag bar on Xfe is still inaccessible. Have to check earlier post for getting it lower on the screen. In any case, it isnt obvious how to accomplish that, as I have gone through all the headings.

There are two instances of the Home icon on desktop, from the start.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: uelsk8s on January 28, 2008, 07:23:19 pm
As long as VL Light targets low-end computers, I think we should make an effort to improve modem detection, even go so far as auto-configuration. As it is now, my Lucent winmodem is not detected. I'm not saying this has to be done for this first edition, but I think that after initial development, we should try to make those improvements for the many users with dialup.
This is a great idea, it would require some of us finding modems and a bit of guessing since we dont have ISP's to dial but it could work.
are there free drivers for the lucent winmodem?

I would like to retain System Profiler and Benchmark in VL Light. This utility is bound to improve and it's useful now.
It is there and will stay

I'm not trying to stir things up, but most minimalistic versions are live CDs as well. How much extra stuff would be required to make VL Light a live CD? I'm just curious.
it is true but really doesnt make much sense livecd's dont work that well on 2x cdroms.
It is very easy to make any VL into a live cd with the VL-live-tools package

Login dialog became inoperable when I selected "Start Fluxbox". In Fluxbox, I tried to call movie player from desktop icon and start menu, with negative results, nothing came up. Is Fluxbox still being developed?
yes it is

Drag bar on Xfe is still inaccessible. Have to check earlier post for getting it lower on the screen. In any case, it isnt obvious how to accomplish that, as I have gone through all the headings.
right click the entry in the panel at the bottom of the screen, this should be fixable in later releases

There are two instances of the Home icon on desktop, from the start.
this will be gone with the adoption of pcmanfm for desktop icons

Thanks,
Uelsk8s
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nubcnubdo on January 28, 2008, 07:42:41 pm
Problem with the JWM menu when called by mouse click. I believe the convention is that the menu should appear only with a right click. Currently the menu appears with either right or left click, and this is problematic when left clicking just about anything, like icons and buttons. That is, rather than opening the app represented by icon or actuating button, I get an unexpected menu. Sometimes, I get both, the desired action and an undesired (context?) menu.

Here is the menu that sometimes appears when I left-click a button:
Code: [Select]
Copy
Copy to Note
Search
Search with
Dictionary
Encyclopedia
Translate
Go to Web Address
Send by Mail

It seems like I can't stay logged in anywhere, not VL Forum, not YouTube. Something wrong with cookies?

CBC Radio not playing out of the box. Can't configure xine to play a streaming URL.
http://www.cbc.ca/listen/
EDIT: I recall that user can run a streaming URL from command prompt (or Run).

JWM desktop icons are dim/faded/blueish until mouse-over causes them to brighten up in color. Depressing appearance.

VLC volume control misplaced, superimposed over button, under Navigation heading. (VL Light A1.7)

IMHO for VL Light there should be no games that would freeze a 500 MHz computer (just to pick an average low-end processor speed).

In Fluxbox, the OS X/Dreamlinux-style icons look inconsistent with the "barebones" appearance of Fluxbox.

Usability study would probably place Run closer to Start button.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: nightflier on January 29, 2008, 05:45:28 am
I think most of the above issues are with idesk, which probably will be replaced with pcmanfm. Try the new .jwmrc file here: http://www.vectorlinux.com/forum2/index.php?topic=5250.msg37171#msg37171

For streaming media, the mplayer plug-in needs two additional packages: sdl and openal. Install with gslapt.

Fluxbox has not been getting much attention yet. It's on the list of things to do.

"Run" close to start button: When launching menu by right-clicking on desktop, the top entry becomes the closest one. However, when using pcmanfm to manage desktop, you're right. Probably a good idea to have "Run", "Home" and maybe "Browser" on the bottom of menu.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: edz on January 31, 2008, 07:45:23 pm
I like vl-light. Hope it be more light.

The mplayer told me no libSDL-1.2.so.0. ???
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: uelsk8s on January 31, 2008, 07:46:53 pm
I like vl-light. Hope it be more light.

The mplayer told me no libSDL-1.2.so.0. ???
slapt-get --update && slapt-get --install sdl
will fix that for you
"more light" means what? smaller size?
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: Witek Mozga on February 01, 2008, 04:39:14 am
"more light" means what? smaller size?

For me it means SPEED. You can make a small 200MB iso with heavyweight apps as XFCE and GIMP and you can make 700MB iso with lightweight environment and many small simple apps (usability of which is usually questionable).

If it cannot be usable let it be fast though  :-\
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: edz on February 01, 2008, 10:57:52 pm
slapt-get --update && slapt-get --install sdl
will fix that for you
"more light" means what? smaller size?

Thank you for your help. I mean more smaller size and more speed. VL 5.1 standard was a very good choice for me. I'll use vl5.9 light after final release.
Title: Re: VL-Light?
Post by: uelsk8s on February 02, 2008, 12:18:27 pm
VL5.9-Light-A2.3 is ready for download here: http://vectorlinux.osuosl.org/Uelsk8s/iso-test/VL5.9-Light-A2.3.iso
Thanks to some heavy work done by Nightflier we have a good looking and usable system.

I guess we dont need to ask this question anymore. :)  so I am locking this thread, thanks for all the comments, and suggestions.
If you want to add anything please do it here: http://www.vectorlinux.com/forum2/index.php?topic=5250.0