Worrying trend.

[hakerdefo]

It's not at all worrying! Once upon a time Unix/Linux usage was limited to scientists, programmers, developers, academics, computer hobbyists. Skill levels of these guys were naturally very high. They were capable of researching, isolating and solving their problems on their own and only in major crisis they used to seek advise in forums and chat rooms.
Things have changed now. Many casual computer users are turning to Linux for a variety of reasons. These casual computer users are nowhere as skilled as the guys I mentioned above. They tend to seek refuge of forums at the first sight of the problem not because they are lazy but most of them don't have necessary knowledge to do the troubleshooting on their own.
It's upto the Debian community in general and experienced users in particular to decide whether to assimilate these new inexperienced users and their seemingly newbish questions or shun them away. And if they decide to choose the later it will be a shame on the community of 'The Universal Operating System'.
Cheers!!!

[Randicus]

Of course inexperienced users should not be turned away, but that does not mean abandoning the philosophy UNIX-based systems are built upon; self-reliance. That does not mean being an expert. What it does mean is at least trying to find solutions: reading the documentation; if not understood or cannot be found, ask on a forum. One of the biggest problems today is the ridiculous attitude that is prevalent; that users should not need to read. If a system is "terrible" enough that it requires user intervention, users are entitled to answers from forum members. Looking at documentation is a waste of their time. Whining sloths consider receiving links to documentation to be rude responses from elitists. Those people should not be welcomed, but those who have an interest and are willing to learn the basics should be welcomed with open arms. After the learn a little, they can become contributing members to a fourm and to the larger open source world.

[Absent Minded]

Of course inexperienced users should not be turned away, but that does not mean abandoning the philosophy UNIX-based systems are built upon; self-reliance. That does not mean being an expert. What it does mean is at least trying to find solutions: reading the documentation; if not understood or cannot be found, ask on a forum. One of the biggest problems today is the ridiculous attitude that is prevalent; that users should not need to read. If a system is "terrible" enough that it requires user intervention, users are entitled to answers from forum members. Looking at documentation is a waste of their time. Whining sloths consider receiving links to documentation to be rude responses from elitists. Those people should not be welcomed, but those who have an interest and are willing to learn the basics should be welcomed with open arms. After the learn a little, they can become contributing members to a fourm and to the larger open source world.

One might say "Amen" to something like that.

[Randicus]

In regards to the problem in the OP.

Makululinux ... is Debian Based, running on Kernel 3.13.x 32bit PAE, provides a Sleek, Smooth and Stable user experience that is able to run on any computer ...

Makulu provides software and codec's pre installed on the OS, to provide an out of the box experience for the end user and his day to day tasks.

Steam is pre installed on Makulu, you can simply log into steam and start playing your favorite game titles.

Wine is pre installed on Makulu, installing windows software has never been easier, simply double click your installer or exe files and they will operate in linux much the same way they do in windows.

1) Debian pre-installed with (I assume) proprietary crapware. No need for users to know the difference between free and proprietary. It just needs to work as-is.
2) An OS is useless without Steam.
3) Comes with Wine so people can use Linux, in this case Debian, without using open source software. They can install a Linux system and still use all their beloved Windows applications. Yippie!

If that distribution survives, soon users will show up here and on DUF asking for help with their "Debian" system. Most likely, they will be seeking help to repair apt, which mysteriously stopped working after adding Butnut repositories.

[kedaha]

but maybe something could be done to buck the "worrying trend."

Kick Comical's developers out of the Debian project?

No! It would be sufficient to kick the Non-Free and Contrib repositories out of Debian.

[Randicus]

Sufficient, but kick Shuttleworth's employees out anyway. If we are lucky they would take Synaptic and Update Manager with them.

[Linadian]

but maybe something could be done to buck the "worrying trend."

Kick Comical's developers out of the Debian project?

No! It would be sufficient to kick the Non-Free and Contrib repositories out of Debian.

Oooooooo, sorry, I have to disagree with that one, contrib and non-free aren't the problem, it's testing and unstable, I agree with an earlier poster, 'hide' the links to testing and unstable, not for wannabes and kiddies. Disabling contrib and non-free would send hordes running to the Frankenbuntus.

[llivv]

Sufficient, but kick Shuttleworth's employees out anyway. If we are lucky they would take Synaptic and Update Manager with them.

then all that we'd have to left to fix would be sysdbus

[kedaha]

Sufficient, but kick Shuttleworth's employees out anyway. If we are lucky they would take Synaptic and Update Manager with them.

You forgot to mention the Ubuntu Software Center! , but regarding synaptic, some kind of gui is necessary for a stable, desktop system where only minimal administration efforts are necessary - like occasional updating etc. A desktop system is pre-eminently a graphical user interface so users can browse the internet, work with the office suite, do spreadsheets or whatever application they care to use without using the command line at all, unless they're running testing or sid. On the other hand, administering a server is a different kettle of fish; it simply cannot be done without continual use of the command line interface when packages like synaptic, update manager and the software center - designed for desktop use - are completely superfluous.

[Randicus]

Does Debian have that Software Centre thingie now? Oh dear.

A desktop system is pre-eminently a graphical user interface

That does not mean using a terminal for basic procedures, such as installing updates, should be eliminated. People who do not want to learn anything, even something as trivial as apt-get update, have systems already created with them in mind. Of course they cost money, but that is the price to pay for freedom and free (no money). (I can see the next few posts already. Angrily denouncing me as an elitist who wants to keep Linux away from the masses, because I know how to use apt-get. )

[edbarx]

For me, when GNU/Linux disposes of the CLI, it will also be the time to consider it a useless alternative to a proprietary OS. systemd is already tentatively pointing in that direction. Statements like runlevels are obsolete don't give favourable indications.

GNU/Linux is letting itself to be raped for the masses, and in the process, it is also losing its identity. Different user interfaces have their pros and cons, let everyone choose. I prefer to have both interfaces. However, with systemd, coincidentally, there are already difficulties booting into a terminal.

The subtle moves:
a) remove runlevels
b) remove data being sent to screen during the boot sequence
c) make it harder to boot into a terminal
d) remove startup scripts to lessen the CLI's importance
e) intermingle everything to make forks difficult to achieve

I may be labelled a paranoid, but the best tactic to destroy an enemy always remains to do it from within. The reasoning is therefore something like this: let us make GNU/Linux very similar to proprietary OSs to appeal for beginners and gain their ferocious support, while at the same time, kill the motivation of all those who use GNU/Linux because it is a different OS with a different philosophy and a different interface.

Hopefully, time proves me wrong, for I love the cause of GNU/Linux.

[Randicus]

Things like Synaptic and Software Shitter can be ignored, but garbage like systemd is a different matter. It is highly doubtful I shall continue using Debian after it is polluted with systemd. If the only alternatives are systems that require me to learn more, so be it. I would miss Debian's huge repositories, but they are not enough to compensate for the systemd travesty.

[goulo]

Yep, I too will change to something else if/when systemd becomes mandatory in Debian sid. I'm hoping my non-use of bloated stuff like Gnome will indefinitely delay that day.

[kedaha]

A desktop system is pre-eminently a graphical user interface

That does not mean using a terminal for basic procedures, such as installing updates, should be eliminated. People who do not want to learn anything, even something as trivial as apt-get update, have systems already created with them in mind. Of course they cost money, but that is the price to pay for freedom and free (no money).

Of course the default installation must always have the terminal even if it isn't used, for example, by an office worker to administer the desktop system. Consider the mass deployment of LiMux on desktop systems in Munich, Germany:

Code: Select all

is a project by the city of Munich to migrate their software systems from closed-source, proprietary Microsoft products to free and open source software. The project was successfully completed in late 2013, which involved migrating 15,000 personal computers and laptops of public employees to free and open source software using the Linux distribution "LiMux" (an Ubuntu derivative) as the operating system and LibreOffice as the primary productivity software.

The users of 15,000 computers running Linux - albeit a Ubuntu derivative - in the public administration, I'm sure aren't required to administer the system by using terminal commands but restrict their use entirely to the user interface while it is left to the IT team to do what they're paid to do. So, while knowing how to use the terminal is essential when administering a server, it is certainly not a precondition for using a stable desktop environment. The idea that Linux today is only for geeks is a piece of FUD.

[TobiSGD]

Does Debian have that Software Centre thingie now?

It was in Squeeze already, not sure about Lenny, but I think it was there, too.

That does not mean using a terminal for basic procedures, such as installing updates, should be eliminated.

How does having a GUI package manager eliminate package management from the terminal.

People who do not want to learn anything, even something as trivial as apt-get update, have systems already created with them in mind.

Indeed, it is called Debian, the universal operating system.

Seriously, what you are promoting is removing choice from Debian, just because you think that people wanting the comfort of a GUI package manager should not use your holy cow, Debian.
<sarcasm>True spirit of open source and Debian as the universal OS, really.</sarcasm>

[TobiSGD]

For me, when GNU/Linux disposes of the CLI, it will also be the time to consider it a useless alternative to a proprietary OS. systemd is already tentatively pointing in that direction. Statements like runlevels are obsolete don't give favourable indications.

Oh come on, what is this again?
Where does systemd dispose of the CLI? Link please.
Regarding runlevels, they are indeed obsolete if you use systemd, systemd uses targets, which is basically the same as runlevels under a different name.

However, with systemd, coincidentally, there are already difficulties booting into a terminal.

Really? That is funny, works fine here.

The subtle moves:
a) remove runlevels
b) remove data being sent to screen during the boot sequence
c) make it harder to boot into a terminal
d) remove startup scripts to lessen the CLI's importance
e) intermingle everything to make forks difficult to achieve

Sorry I have to say that, but this sounds once again like FUD from uninformed people.
I really would like you to answer me a question: Did you come to those conclusions after studying systemd yourself or do you just repeat what you have read on random blogs?

Things like Synaptic and Software Shitter can be ignored, but garbage like systemd is a different matter. It is highly doubtful I shall continue using Debian after it is polluted with systemd. If the only alternatives are systems that require me to learn more, so be it. I would miss Debian's huge repositories, but they are not enough to compensate for the systemd travesty.

Same question for you. How did you come to that conclusion, how did your process of evaluation look like?

[llivv]

Things like Synaptic and Software Shitter can be ignored, but garbage like systemd is a different matter. It is highly doubtful I shall continue using Debian after it is polluted with systemd. If the only alternatives are systems that require me to learn more, so be it. I would miss Debian's huge repositories, but they are not enough to compensate for the systemd travesty.

Why was I worried that you were were not posting for a month or two?
That's why!
forget the stuff we disagree on, I'm sure there are at least a few points, but I can't be bothered to remember any of them.

[Randicus]

People who do not want to learn anything, even something as trivial as apt-get update, have systems already created with them in mind.

Indeed, it is called Debian, the universal operating system.

If you knew as much as you believe you do, you would know that "universal operating system" refers to any architecture and use, not every person on the planet.

Seriously, what you are promoting is removing choice from Debian, just because you think that people wanting the comfort of a GUI package manager should not use your holy cow, Debian.

What a load of horse crap. How do you equate believing the CLI should not be eliminated with promoting removal of choice? Whatever you are putting in your coffee, stop it before it does permanent damage. And if Debian is my holy cow, why am I making this post with Slackware?

Same question for you. How did you come to that conclusion, how did your process of evaluation look like?

How did I come to the conclusion that I do not want to use systemd? I am sorry you are offended by people who do not like the same things you do. I am not going to try justifying that decision to fanbois who obstinately dismiss any evidence or facts against systemd as FUD. Especially one who twists the meanings of things he reads. (Such as interpreting, "The CLI should not be abandoned" to mean, "Choice should be removed.")

Why was I worried that you were were not posting for a month or two?

My activity will end again without notice. I only post here when I am extremely bored or even more cantankerous than usual.

[golinux]

Randicus . . . don't worry, be happy. You're taking this waaaay to seriously . . .

[kedaha]

People who do not want to learn anything, even something as trivial as apt-get update, have systems already created with them in mind. Of course they cost money, but that is the price to pay for freedom and free (no money).

Such people are also the target of Debian Blends as detailed here; for example:

These people are often not interested in the computer for its own sake, but just want it to work for them....most target users have no or little interest in administration of their computer. In short, the optimal situation would be that he would not even notice the existence of the computer, but just focus on using the application to accomplish the task at hand.

But why would they need to learn systems administration anyway unless they wanted to run a server or track testing and sid? To quote the The Debian GNU/Linux FAQ:

One of the main reasons many people choose Debian over other Linux distributions is that it requires very little administration. People want a system that just works. In general one can say that, stable requires very little maintenance while testing and unstable require constant maintenance from the administrator. If you are running stable, all you need to worry about is, keeping track of security updates. If you are running either testing or unstable it is a good idea to be aware of the new bugs discovered in the installed packages, new bugfixes/features introduced etc.

Finally, as emariz says in an old post:viewtopic.php?f=20&t=80974&start=15#p440074:

There is a huge difference between using and administrating a computer, and these task are mostly unrelated. A competent user may never have to perform an administrative task, and a capable administrator may never be a competent user of everyday applications.