[ Closed ] Should the Lite edition be scrapped in favour of 64bit? (Page 1 of 2)

Could you elaborate as to what the Lite edition entails, exactly?  Simply fewer apps installed by default?  Anything else?

The omission of OpenOffice in favor of Abiword and Gnumeric in a default install is brilliant, BTW.

That is pretty much it. The last Lite edition was exactly the same as the normal edition, except it had all but the terminal, web browser, editor and file manager removed. It was produced to appease the users who commented that there were too many applications available.

Have you tried Ubuntu's MinimalCD? I have tried both Debian's netinst and Ubuntu's MinimalCD, IMHO there is not much difference between the two. CrunchBang's alternative installation uses the Ubuntu MinimalCD as its base. I do not think the process is too different.

I agree -- I think it's better to open up the community, especially in this early incarnation of the Distro, to 64-bit users, rather than those who simply want to work inside of the #! framework.  I'd argue that the strength of distro is its set of applications, all of which are rather intuitive and lightweight, and that it gives #! the character that makes it so appealing.

So, for the time being, I'd say set aside the Lite version and accommodate 64-bit users.

I am hesitant to post this because I am not sure of the value it would add but, hey , I guess I just like the sound of my own voice! 

People using 64-bit aren't particularly fussed about installing heavier apps because they don't really experience the same lag or delays, often using better hardware than 32-bit machines.

People who desire more of a minimalist lite distro do so for two reasons:

1.  They are restricted by resources.
2.  They will fully customise the distro by loading the apps they are used to.

So, my point is, (being a 'have my cake and eat it' kind of guy) could you write a lite edition and a 64-bit lite edition with absolutely the barest selection of apps preloaded?  People can then add whatever apps they wished. 

Of course, I am sure that you don't have a day job or any other drain on your time and would get cracking straight away to please your growing number of crunchbang fans!  Apologies in advance to Trouble'n'strife!

I guess I'm one to talk, as despite the fact that i've proposed the 64-bit version as more useful than the lite version, I personally would give Lite a shot, and don't even have the hardware to run 64-bit.  I suppose I'm partial to the #! app list, but I suppose a Lite version of the distro would help me to appreciate the finer points of its operation to a greater extent.

Philip,
I have no use personally for a 64bit version, but I think there is a strong argument for making one.

Rather than a lite version as a full distro, I would suggest some sort of script or desktop metapackage that can be applied to an Ubuntu (and/or Debian Lenny?) minimal install to create a Crunchbang-themed Openbox desktop with no applications. It would make sense in this instance to use the auto-updating Debian menu. Just a thought...

Thank you for all the feedback. It seems that the "Lite" edition is more popular than I had thought. So, I will continue with the "Lite" edition, before moving to the 64bit edition. Again, thank you to everybody who posted, in future I will know where to come when I am in two minds

Although personally I wouldn't use the 64 bit version, I think in terms of strategy, it would be better to do that than a lite version.

If a Lite version is only some apps less, then a wiki entry of all the packages that are in the full version should be sufficient for people to put together a script along the lines of:

sudo aptitude remove gimp
sudo aptitude remove inkscape
...
...

to suit their purposes.

Last edited by ShaqArif (2008-12-01 16:46:31)

Am I right in assuming that the lite edition is just the full edition without the apps that aren't absolutely essential (like.. Kino, 2 terminal emulators, gimp, inkscape) but keeping things like abiword, one word processor, and one music client?

If so, it might be interesting to look for even more lightweight alternatives to the default applications, and perhaps even completely remove the gnome deps. We could use transmission instead of deluge (no pygtk), mplayer instead of totem (almost no deps there), quod libet instead of rhythmbox (no gnome) and even something like wicd instead of networkmanager. I don't know what to do about abiword though, because it has in the last years gone from pure GTK+ to requiring all kinds of gnome deps.

What would you all want? Would you like simply "full" #! without the fluff, or even lighter apps?

snowpine,

Whoops. Shouldn't have jumped to conclusions. Thanks for the quick response. I will definitely actually check it out. Sorry to be hijacking this thread, but if I install that version will it easily upgrade to 8.10.01's packages or should I wait for the 8.10 lite?

IMO theres not many distros that fit that niche. Either they chock full of apps and whatnot, or theyre the build-it-yourself type (like Arch).

I agree that CrunchBang is a great middle ground and thats why I look forward to the lite version.

Last edited by anonymous (2008-12-02 06:11:08)

Yep, I know about it, haven't tried it, though. Thanks for the info, good to know!