Linux Mint Helena

[tomp01]

I have just installed Linux Mint Helena on my PC and I have to say that I'm very impressed. Considering that it is a team of volunteers they do a fantastic job, it is really nice that virtually everything is there out of the box. Helena is the Mint equivalent of Karmic Koala.

I know that it is Canonical's policy to ship without the restricted codecs, Flash, Skype etc but I still can't see why Mint can do it and (K)ubuntu cannot. Firefox, VLC, Gimp and Thunderbird are all there without needing to be installed because they don't try to squeeze everything onto a CD sized disk.

I have had problems with Firefox and the Bookmark This Page option in the Bookmarks menu where it would refuse to scroll with certain FF themes, this works perfectly in Mint. FF also seems to be open up faster. I also upgraded from KDE 4.3.4 to 4.1.1 without any of the problems I encountered with KK. The only real problem so far is that Amarok won't play CDs even with 2.3.0.

Has anybody else tried Helena?

[Snowhog]

Re: Linux Mint Helena

I know that it is Canonical's policy to ship without the restricted codecs, Flash, Skype etc but I still can't see why Mint can do it and (K)ubuntu cannot.

Then you haven't read/understood Canonical's philosophy. It's isnt' that they (physically) can't package the codecs - obviously it is possible to do so - they choose not to do so. Nothing more complicated than that.

[claydoh]

Re: Linux Mint Helena

I have just installed Linux Mint Helena on my PC and I have to say that I'm very impressed. Considering that it is a team of volunteers they do a fantastic job, it is really nice that virtually everything is there out of the box. Helena is the Mint equivalent of Karmic Koala.

I know that it is Canonical's policy to ship without the restricted codecs, Flash, Skype etc but I still can't see why Mint can do it and (K)ubuntu cannot. Firefox, VLC, Gimp and Thunderbird are all there without needing to be installed because they don't try to squeeze everything onto a CD sized disk.

In many countries, it is technically illegal to install codecs, so so most of the 'big' distros do not provide them, though some make it easier to get them than others . Probably the 'small' guys won't show up on anyone's radar so to speak. Non-free software is not generally installed by default on many distros for philosophical reasons, but are made relatively easy to access.

And one of Ubuntu's (and Kubuntu's) ideals is to provide a single-cd distro, as that makes the distro accessible to the greatest amount of people in terms of download size/speed. I personally only use/try single cd releases for the most part. Not everyone wants or needs Firefox, VLC, Gimp and Thunderbird installed by default, and Kubuntu does not do so. One of a distro's tasks is to provide what they believe is the best selection of software to install, and we choose to use KDE/QT applications for this purpose.

I have had problems with Firefox and the Bookmark This Page option in the Bookmarks menu where it would refuse to scroll with certain FF themes, this works perfectly in Mint. FF also seems to be open up faster. I also upgraded from KDE 4.3.4 to 4.1.1 without any of the problems I encountered with KK. The only real problem so far is that Amarok won't play CDs even with 2.3.0.

Probably, as quite a large majority of packages in Mint are simply Ubuntu packages from Ubuntu repos, I would guess that Mint's FF is also installing a lot of the gnome/gtk bits that Kubuntu doesn't/can't. I have heard that it is faster in Ubuntu due to their packaging and integration. I don't find FF too slow, but my main machine is an old P4 2.0 laptop with 1gb of ram, so I am probably used to that small amount of extra time it takes for most apps to load/run

Has anybody else tried Helena?

I have not in quite some time, but when I did I found it installed far too much stuff for my liking and wasn't much different from installing Ubuntu at that time

[tomp01]

Re: Linux Mint Helena

I know that it is Canonical's policy to ship without the restricted codecs, Flash, Skype etc but I still can't see why Mint can do it and (K)ubuntu cannot.

Then you haven't read/understood Canonical's philosophy. It's isnt' that they (physically) can't package the codecs - obviously it is possible to do so - they choose not to do so. Nothing more complicated than that.

Then they could make it a lot easier for newbies to enable them, it could easily take the form of a yes or no question on installation. I have had to do it so often due to breakages but it is very confusing for novices. I think the point made elsewhere that Canonical care mostly about Ubuntu is well made and has more than a grain of truth in it. Mint works out of the box and doesn't need a lot of tweaking, I would definitely recommend it for new KDE/Gnome users.

[tomp01]

Re: Linux Mint Helena

I have just installed Linux Mint Helena on my PC and I have to say that I'm very impressed. Considering that it is a team of volunteers they do a fantastic job, it is really nice that virtually everything is there out of the box. Helena is the Mint equivalent of Karmic Koala.

I know that it is Canonical's policy to ship without the restricted codecs, Flash, Skype etc but I still can't see why Mint can do it and (K)ubuntu cannot. Firefox, VLC, Gimp and Thunderbird are all there without needing to be installed because they don't try to squeeze everything onto a CD sized disk.

In many countries, it is technically illegal to install codecs, so so most of the 'big' distros do not provide them, though some make it easier to get them than others . Probably the 'small' guys won't show up on anyone's radar so to speak. Non-free software is not generally installed by default on many distros for philosophical reasons, but are made relatively easy to access.

And one of Ubuntu's (and Kubuntu's) ideals is to provide a single-cd distro, as that makes the distro accessible to the greatest amount of people in terms of download size/speed. I personally only use/try single cd releases for the most part. Not everyone wants or needs Firefox, VLC, Gimp and Thunderbird installed by default, and Kubuntu does not do so. One of a distro's tasks is to provide what they believe is the best selection of software to install, and we choose to use KDE/QT applications for this purpose.

I have had problems with Firefox and the Bookmark This Page option in the Bookmarks menu where it would refuse to scroll with certain FF themes, this works perfectly in Mint. FF also seems to be open up faster. I also upgraded from KDE 4.3.4 to 4.1.1 without any of the problems I encountered with KK. The only real problem so far is that Amarok won't play CDs even with 2.3.0.

Probably, as quite a large majority of packages in Mint are simply Ubuntu packages from Ubuntu repos, I would guess that Mint's FF is also installing a lot of the gnome/gtk bits that Kubuntu doesn't/can't. I have heard that it is faster in Ubuntu due to their packaging and integration. I don't find FF too slow, but my main machine is an old P4 2.0 laptop with 1gb of ram, so I am probably used to that small amount of extra time it takes for most apps to load/run

Has anybody else tried Helena?

I have not in quite some time, but when I did I found it installed far too much stuff for my liking and wasn't much different from installing Ubuntu at that time

First point, the FF problem with bookmarks also occurs with Ubuntu. I even emailed the developer of the Extreme Noia theme and he told me that the problem only seems to happen in Kubuntu/Ubuntu.

Second point, as FF is the most popular open source browser, that it isn't shipped as standard in Kubuntu is just stupid even Ubuntu ships it. Who even uses Konqueror anymore?

Third point, what's so special about a single CD policy anyway? Linux Mint Helena KDE edition takes up around 1.1 gig and saves a bucket load of aggro for newbies. How many questions are there on this forum from novices asking about codecs, Flash, repositories etc?

[claydoh]

Re: Linux Mint Helena

as I mentioned, single-cd is the size that best fits the download capabilities of the most people possible. Not everyone has 5mb or more connections, and some places have download caps. From a developer's/distributor's standpoint it forces them pick and choose the components that they feel best represent what a wide range of users will use, and ones that work well together, etc.

And as I mentioned, Kubuntu chooses to be a KDE/QT specific distro, a KDE showcase if you will. It is one of the things that differentiates us from other distros. Plus it also has to work well as a live-cd, don't forget that part. Space issues come into play again here. Having FF as default has been discussed many times, but it would mean removing something in order to get it on the disk.

As for flash, and codecs, well arent those prompted to be installed when opening Konqueror, Dragon player, or Amarok is used ? And what repositories should a newbie be using? Aren't the standard ones quite full of good stuff? Most of the questions I see relate more to the pesky non-free video drivers more than the codecs/flash anymore

Not trying to come off as trying to shoot you down, but all this boils down to personal preference issues, really. Even the initial lack of (potentially illegal) codecs and non-free software is that. And in Linux, you can always change around what you don't like, or find the one that you have to tweak the least. And no one will dis you for doing so.

[tomp01]

Re: Linux Mint Helena

as I mentioned, single-cd is the size that best fits the download capabilities of the most people possible. Not everyone has 5mb or more connections, and some places have download caps. From a developer's/distributor's standpoint it forces them pick and choose the components that they feel best represent what a wide range of users will use, and ones that work well together, etc.

And as I mentioned, Kubuntu chooses to be a KDE/QT specific distro, a KDE showcase if you will. It is one of the things that differentiates us from other distros. Plus it also has to work well as a live-cd, don't forget that part. Space issues come into play again here. Having FF as default has been discussed many times, but it would mean removing something in order to get it on the disk.

As for flash, and codecs, well arent those prompted to be installed when opening Konqueror, Dragon player, or Amarok is used ? And what repositories should a newbie be using? Aren't the standard ones quite full of good stuff? Most of the questions I see relate more to the pesky non-free video drivers more than the codecs/flash anymore

Not trying to come off as trying to shoot you down, but all this boils down to personal preference issues, really. Even the initial lack of (potentially illegal) codecs and non-free software is that. And in Linux, you can always change around what you don't like, or find the one that you have to tweak the least. And no one will dis you for doing so.

I don't have a 5mb connection, I am lucky to get 2.5mb but even at that speed Linux Mint only takes a hour or so to download. If you are talking about removing stuff then Konqueror is a good candidate as virtually nobody uses it and those that do can download it. If people have very slow connections then there is always the Shipit option or you can buy a disk off Ebay for very little.

In software sources for Linux Mint, there are a number of repositories enabled including Medibuntu and there is nothing to stop people disabling any ones that they don't want. I am approaching this from the point of view of something using Kubuntu for the first time, once they have more experience then they can decide what they want. I stand by my statement that Mint is without doubt the easiest to use for a newbie, after all don't we want more people to use Kubuntu and not be put off?

[claydoh]

Re: Linux Mint Helena

Konqueror is more than just a web browser, don't forget, and it is part of even the most basic KDE default install .

Actually, Konqueror is basically a font-end for various KDE bits that handle html, file management so it isn't really a big savings in file size, definitely not enough to cover the size firefox takes. The webkit-based Rekonq and aroroa browsers have been considered as well, but aren't quite ready.

Yes, we do want to make it easier for people, but we also want to use and promote the concepts of free and open software and open standards as well.

If we did everything that , say, Mint did, then, well, we'd beMint. But we have somewhat different goals.


It takes me close 3 hours to download the mint image btw

[Telengard]

Re: Linux Mint Helena

Who even uses Konqueror anymore?

* Ahem! *
Some of us like Konqueror. It may not be a 100% replacement for all the fancy stuff Firefox can do, but Konqueror is certainly a very capable web browser and file manager. I use it all the time on all my Kubuntu machines, and I know that many others do too.

[Snowhog]

Re: Linux Mint Helena

I use it here. I've tried FF and GC, but Konqueror works just fine for me. It's clean and straightforward; does what I want it to do.

[tomp01]

Re: Linux Mint Helena

I use it here. I've tried FF and GC, but Konqueror works just fine for me. It's clean and straightforward; does what I want it to do.

I can't frankly understand why there is such an obsession with packing everything onto a CD, FF is only 12-13mb so why can't the ISO disk be a DVD? If Mint can do it then so can Canonical.

[gemmakaru]

Re: Linux Mint Helena

I much prefer having a single cd installation containing a sensible array of apps followed by choosing what I want from the fabulous package system. Part of the attraction of Linux for me is the choices that is gives me. One of the reasons I gave up Suse 10 was because it gave me a DVD full of stuff I really didn't want and took an absolute age to install it too. I bought those Suse disks too, cost me a Quid too. ripoff

[tomp01]

Re: Linux Mint Helena

I much prefer having a single cd installation containing a sensible array of apps followed by choosing what I want from the fabulous package system. Part of the attraction of Linux for me is the choices that is gives me. One of the reasons I gave up Suse 10 was because it gave me a DVD full of stuff I really didn't want and took an absolute age to install it too. I bought those Suse disks too, cost me a Quid too. ripoff

I really not understand why people have to exaggerate to make a point, just because you go over the limit for a CD does not mean you are strangely compelled to fill it up with extraneous stuff. I would prefer Firefox on the disk rather than Amarok if space is such an issue, it doesn't work properly anyway so it won't be a great loss.

[claydoh]

Re: Linux Mint Helena

I really not understand why people have to exaggerate to make a point, just because you go over the limit for a CD does not mean you are strangely compelled to fill it up with extraneous stuff.

It is not an exaggeration, and I don't think you get the concepts behind that choice.

I would prefer Firefox on the disk rather than Amarok if space is such an issue, it doesn't work properly anyway so it won't be a great loss.

Again, it is a personal preference thing. A distro's job is to pick and choose the selection of applications it feels best suits its needs. Mint (or PCLos, or Mandriva or Suse or Vector or whomever) simply have chosen a different set of those. Which is awesome, but Mint doesn't satisfy everyone on everything all the time either. Which is perfectly fine.

Mint's choices do not fit me, I do not like Thunderbird, and Songbird over Amarok? Not for me either, at least not on my old laptop.

If Koffice becomes a true viable alternative to Openoffice, then there would be room for Firefox, it's KDE integration packages and other dependencies as well as games too

[dibl]

Re: Linux Mint Helena

I much prefer having a single cd installation containing a sensible array of apps followed by choosing what I want from the fabulous package system.

+1

The Debian Advanced Packaging System (and consequently the Ubuntu system) is one of the most powerful advantages of Debian Linux and its derivatives. No need for a box full of DVDs, unless you want it that way. With a fully functional system from the Live or Alternate Install CD, and 27,000 packages in the repos, everyone gets his ideal combination -- everything is just an "apt-get" away. It could not be more efficient.