| persia | tcdiem_, Really, it's up to you, to determine what you want. The choice between lpia and i386 ought be based on which you find works better on your hardware. The choice of packages or flavour is really which you find a good set of defaults from which you can customise your system. | 03:44 |
|---|---|---|
| === ssweeny_ is now known as ssweeny | ||
| === asac_ is now known as asac | ||
| Guest55353 | HI guys | 12:08 |
| Guest55353 | could I ask some question? | 12:09 |
| ogra | :) | 12:09 |
| Guest55353 | User can expect a new desktop concept for netbooks with Ubuntu ARM or the same desktop present in Ubuntu AMD64 will be port. | 12:09 |
| Guest55353 | Do you know if any software specific for ARM is under development? | 12:09 |
| Guest55353 | And any usability study was made to adapt the linux desktop to 10" screen? | 12:09 |
| ogra | as i told you in the arm channel, the CPU architecture has nothing to do with the desktop concept :) | 12:10 |
| Guest55353 | ok | 12:11 |
| ogra | we have a team that works on the 1024x600 (or soon 1024x576) desktop stuff | 12:11 |
| Guest55353 | but the canonical is trying to enter to tha Netbook market, isn't? | 12:11 |
| ogra | (note it also has nothing to do with the screen size, a 10" screen culd happily run 1280x1024) | 12:11 |
| ogra | heh | 12:11 |
| ogra | canonical is already in the netbook market | 12:11 |
| ogra | ubuntu-netbook-remix on netbooks exists since a year | 12:12 |
| Guest55353 | So if I have a Netbook with ubuntu, it will be the same that I have on my PC computer? | 12:12 |
| ogra | no, the desktop looks different, and the apps are adjusted to fit into 1024x600 | 12:12 |
| ogra | http://tombuntu.com/index.php/2008/06/03/canonical-announces-the-ubuntu-netbook-remix/ thats how it looks like | 12:13 |
| ogra | (its a very old screenshot, it changes a bit) | 12:13 |
| ogra | *changed | 12:13 |
| ogra | http://flickr.com/photos/njpatel/tags/netbookremix. has more | 12:14 |
| njpatel | note: the first two are mockups | 12:14 |
| Guest55353 | I'm asking that because everyone are saying that the canonical only empacoted the Debian reposiitori. And I'm trying to discovery if canonical have some Merits | 12:15 |
| ogra | empacoted ? | 12:16 |
| ogra | what does that word mean ? | 12:16 |
| Guest55353 | re-packaging debian's package | 12:17 |
| Guest55353 | sorry | 12:17 |
| ogra | ubuntu takes the packages from debian unstable every six months and adds the ubuntu changes to them | 12:17 |
| ogra | whie it is based on the debian packages, you have three months of development going on in ubuntu and three months of stabilization and QA before it gets released | 12:18 |
| ogra | *while | 12:18 |
| Guest55353 | And canonical doesn't develop nothin? | 12:19 |
| ogra | canonical sponsors ubuntu ... and has an additional team that does customizations of a stable ubuntu release for customers ... | 12:20 |
| ogra | if the customizations make sense they go back into ubuntu | 12:20 |
| ogra | but canonical and ubuntu are distinct one is a company making money with support and customization of a product ... and the other is a product developed by an opensource community | 12:21 |
| Guest55353 | Like Fedora and Rad Hat | 12:22 |
| ogra | ubuntu is just a distro | 12:22 |
| ogra | no | 12:22 |
| ogra | fedora and redhat are different | 12:22 |
| Guest55353 | owo | 12:22 |
| ogra | canonical doesnt *sell* ubuntu | 12:22 |
| ogra | redhat sells fedora with added stuff | 12:22 |
| Guest55353 | just support? | 12:23 |
| ogra | canonical only offers services around ubuntu | 12:23 |
| ogra | and customization | 12:23 |
| davmor2 | Guest55353: All the updates and stable patches we produce are pushed back up stream to debian so in effect if you hack on debian or ubuntu you help both projects | 12:23 |
| Guest55353 | ok | 12:23 |
| ogra | i.e. if your company develops some shiny new netbook and you want to be sure ubuntu runs *absolutely perfect* on that device, you can ask canonical to make sure it does and pay for it | 12:24 |
| ogra | and if your product gets released you can make up contracts with canonical that your customers can get support | 12:25 |
| Guest55353 | If Gnome don't change the look, canonical will never do. Right? | 12:25 |
| ogra | you are mixing up things :) | 12:26 |
| ogra | if *ubuntu* finds something looks better than gnome develops it, it might change something (and indeed send that change to gnome as well) | 12:26 |
| Guest55353 | sorry | 12:26 |
| ogra | in ubuntu there are changes that gnome didnt accept | 12:27 |
| ogra | if canonical makes changes to ubuntu that might fit into the distro, canonical sends them to ubuntu ... | 12:27 |
| ogra | ... ubuntu sends them to gnome | 12:27 |
| Guest55353 | Like Mack sad that in Ubuntu 9.04 it will changes into usability and other stuffs, but if Gnome or other projects don't chenge nothin, how canonical could promiss that? | 12:28 |
| ogra | if gnome accepts the changes they show up in gnome ... if not and ubuntu still wants the change it will only be in ubuntu | 12:28 |
| ogra | as i said, ubuntu has changes gnome doesnt like ... but these changes are still in ubuntu | 12:29 |
| Guest55353 | nice | 12:29 |
| ogra | indeed, keeping such changes and adjusting them for each new gnome is a lot of work | 12:29 |
| ogra | so indeed, ubuntu prefers it if the changes are accepted by gnome | 12:30 |
| Guest55353 | Why everyone say that Canonical don't cotribute? With like Novell | 12:30 |
| ogra | but if they arent and ubuntu wants to keep them, ubuntu keeps the change in place | 12:30 |
| ogra | you have to aks the people that say that :) | 12:30 |
| ogra | *ask | 12:30 |
| ogra | there are surely areas where canonical makes less changes ... i.e. the kernel ... so there are not many changes to send to the upstream developers | 12:31 |
| Guest55353 | They sad that canonica's only re-packaging debian's package | 12:31 |
| Guest55353 | why don't make a union Debina-Canonical? | 12:32 |
| ogra | thats not true | 12:32 |
| ogra | because debian doesnt have a stable release cycle | 12:32 |
| ogra | many changes from ubuntu go into debian | 12:32 |
| Guest55353 | or why don't improve dkgk engeene? | 12:32 |
| Guest55353 | dpkg | 12:33 |
| Guest55353 | like Novell did with zypper.... | 12:33 |
| ogra | many changes to dpkg were made by ubuntu in the last five years, most of them are in debian | 12:33 |
| Guest55353 | have a place so I can read? | 12:33 |
| ogra | http://www.ubuntu.com/community/ubuntustory/debian probably | 12:35 |
| Guest55353 | I like Canonical and Ubuntu, but I don't have arguments to debat with Debian's lovers or OpenSUSE.... Thats why I'm asking you gys | 12:35 |
| Guest55353 | Like Now, everyone are looking for Ubunto-arm port | 12:36 |
| ogra | thats good :) | 12:37 |
| Guest55353 | but if canonical only re-packaging the ubuntu repository, it will be a failure | 12:38 |
| ogra | why do you think that ? | 12:38 |
| Guest55353 | because, mobile things need a special atencion | 12:39 |
| Guest55353 | have a small screen | 12:40 |
| ogra | mobile != ARM | 12:40 |
| ogra | :) | 12:40 |
| Guest55353 | so it needs a usability study | 12:40 |
| Guest55353 | mobile use ARM | 12:40 |
| ogra | we have the ubuntu mobile edition (which is a desktop, independent of what CPU you use) and we have the ubuntu netbook remix (which is also a desktop flavour and again not depending on the CPU) | 12:41 |
| ogra | the GUI you use doesnt have anything to do with the CPU ;) | 12:41 |
| Guest55353 | ok | 12:41 |
| ogra | for ARM simply *all* packages in ubuntu will be made available on that CPU architecture | 12:42 |
| Guest55353 | this Canonical-ARM is to Desktop? | 12:42 |
| ogra | its up to you if you want to use ubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-mobile, ubuntu-netbook or even xubuntu or kde on your hardware | 12:42 |
| ogra | for this release we focus on desktop, server and probably netbooks for ARM ... | 12:43 |
| ogra | this release will come out in april | 12:43 |
| ogra | for the next release you might be able to get more i.e. ubuntu-mobile and other desktop flavours on ARM | 12:44 |
| ogra | (next release will come out in october) | 12:44 |
| Guest55353 | why Canonical don't port gnome to qt4.5? | 12:46 |
| Guest55353 | lol | 12:46 |
| ogra | because we would hae to call it KDE then :) | 12:47 |
| Guest55353 | where is the ubuntu 9.04 channel? | 12:47 |
| ogra | #ubuntu+1 i think | 12:48 |
| Guest55353 | no | 12:48 |
| Guest55353 | KDE is a holycrap | 12:48 |
| ogra | did you try kubuntu ? | 12:48 |
| ogra | its not much different to the ubuntu desktop | 12:48 |
| Guest55353 | KDE don't works | 12:48 |
| Guest55353 | there programas aren't good | 12:49 |
| Guest55353 | like Koopete, it's a joke | 12:49 |
| Guest55353 | Dolphin, hahaha | 12:49 |
| raph_ael | hello | 14:20 |
| persia | hello raph_ael | 14:22 |
| === ogra_ is now known as ogra | ||
| amitk | useful link comparing various wear-levelling flash fs: http://free-electrons.com/pub/conferences/2008/jm2l/flash-filesystems.pdf | 15:20 |
| === crevette_ is now known as crevette | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!