Anyone here try Fuduntu

Someone recommended it to me in Google+ for laptop use. Cannot find much about it on the web.

What I did read here does not seem to promising.

 

there is more reviews of it on distrowatch.
DistroWatch.com: Fuduntu

that being said, it doesn't really interest me.

 

No. 10char

 

I recently tried Fuduntu on my old Toshiba laptop running an Intel E8200 with 2GB of RAM and I honestly didnt like it. I had a real hard time setting up my network printer, it could not recognize my webcam and it didnt want to properly update after installation.

I switched to Lubuntu and have been very pleased not just because of the familiarity but because it barely puts a dent into RAM or CPU resources.

I did not read your link but I was wondering if you were looking into itbecause you need a lightweight Linuz distro or just out of curiosity.

 

@masterchef

What does no mean?

@Bug

Someone recommended it to me. My level of curiosity is below the level I would need to actually download and test it out myself. So I did the lazy thing and ask here.

Absent a strong recommendation I would not try it.

 

It's Andrew Wyatt's attempt to make Fedora a little more friendly out of the box. I guess Fuduntu would be to Fedora as Linux Mint is to Ubuntu? If you are familiar with Fedora I'm sure you would have no problems.

Wyatt's other claim to fame is the jupiter applet which allows you to throttle your processor. He also writes and develops ppas for webupd8 I believe.

 

Thanks for the info. The Jupiter thing sounds interesting.

 

..yeah.. great review. "I filled the live-distro filesystem by installing programs that won't be saved on a live-distro anyway - and now strange things started to happen! I didn't see that coming at all! Specially since it also happens with every single other live-image".

No, I don't know. I've been testing out different distros on a lot of different setups over the last few years. I've liked two distros enough to continue using them. Sabayon. And Fuduntu. Still use Fuduntu on my Eee, and dual-boot it on my new pc.

I successfully get Windows-people over to Linux with Fuduntu by the way. Because it's a solid and stable spin (as in deliberately not breaking things - it's a rolling distro unlike Ubuntu, etc. Nothing in the package well that suddenly is outdated, or a new driver that breaks something with an update, that kind of thing). And because you don't need to be a power-user to understand what you have to do. That's really the best part. It's not a spin made by office-rats, who think everyone think exactly like they do.

 

are you familiar with the term I just made up: "antiyes"?

 

Be nice masterchef.

 

Okay...okay. I was hoping for some details on why you said no. But dropped the idea anyway.

 

I thought you were being facetious. The reason is that I prefer Fedora (and I have a feeling that most people who would consider a Fedora / Ubuntu hybrid would ultimately agree) is that I am really happier with just Fedora.

 

..it's not a hybrid between ubuntu and fedora. It's a spin forked from fedora 14. Intending to have the latest kernels and hardware support possible, as long as it's stable (and doesn't break anything backwards, like Fedora frequently does). So you can keep your customisation with the new updates without problems, no need to update every single library and dependence three times a week, etc.

So, to allow a rolling update, so new major versions are part of the updates from the package well.

They also don't keep forcing you to use open formats when that doesn't make sense, while hiding the existence of the other formats - which both ubuntu and fedora does.

On top of that they added a "full desktop" setup, rather than a specifically "netbook" based build with maximus for window-manager, and so on. So it's a light spin that works on an Eee, or on a larger laptop.

In any case, it's also benefiting a lot from the fact that the guys who maintain the spin actually use it themselves.. So we don't suddenly get things like: "hey, look, we're going to change the desktop environment completely, because it looks so flashy".

Along with "and here's three hundred extra services for all the features you don't need, and slow the system down to a crawl, just in case we're going to get angry internet people complaining that it's not possible to instantly shell in with a Mac on a virtual console". Etc..

 

I see your point. The Jupiter power saving... err thingy... is what interests me most

 

spiritual hybrid (as in spiritual sequel). Same result, I still feel like anyone looking for something that has roots (stylistic) in Ubuntu and Fedora would ultimately just be happier with Fedora.

 

Well.. yes, I see your point. But no, not really

I mean, everything in Ubuntu that makes Ubuntu Ubuntu, is just a layer over the debian foundation. And there has been a lot of distros on debian turning up that very specifically pare down a lot of the default bloat and extra scripts that Ubuntu insists on installing.

Once upon a time, Ubuntu was actually possible to run on an EeePC, for example. That's not the case any more. So you have Pupeee, or Mint, etc., that a lot of people flock to. Because.. and they almost advertise with that.. that it's Ubuntu without the bloat, and without the open format restrictions by default.

The package well, in the same way, is usually geared for rolling updates. But there's so much draft in the database, that if you're looking to update this on an Eee, you're struggling with the sheer size of the updates. It really needs some sort of prescience to use debian and guarantee that all updates are stable, for example. It's individually maintained packages, and they graduate at different speeds and different criteria. PPAs that add packages you trust suddenly connect to new major versions that break scripts..

So the end result being that you might end up with a problem with a new major version, because it's not tested towards the minor or earlier version you have. Or that your spin is based on. And you're stuck with a semi-working distro, or a need to replace the core every other week.

Or the opposite - if you keep using edge-packages, then they might break with new major versions. And area edge-maintainers really going to care, and spend time fishing out that bug that keeps breaking their hard work? Depends, right..?

Fedora has other things that are useful. But they also have new versions every couple of weeks. And since they won't backup packages endlessly, you're either stuck without updates, or gambling on that the new major version isn't going to suddenly break backwards. Had that with wifi on the ralink cards for months. One version had the open source drivers working, the other didn't. And that literally switched back and forth every two weeks. "Oh, great, now the gimp filters are working, but wifi doesn't". The linux variant of the windows bug: "I turned on the coffee-machine, and the program hanged itself".

Was a really annoying problem. So I was kind of looking into making my own distro for a while that would maintain package scripts, and only add new updates that were guaranteed to not break earlier versions (that would be kept). But while inserting new kernels, and keeping up with the newest display drivers for example. Would also not nazi the open source formats, but encourage using them, of course. Would support the latest filesystems, would make sure power-management would work, suspend states were written properly, signals going through the same order every time, etc. Things that plague most other distros.. would keep filing away at that. Did that until I found out exactly how much work would be involved in creating a fork, and then gave up.

Anyway. And then I find out that Fewt had actually made exactly the kind of spin I was looking into creating, for exactly the same reasons. So no, it's not a spiritual hybrid sequel to ubuntu. Sure, it's supposed to have the visual flair that Ubuntu has, while being the more solid Red Hat styled distro like Fedora or Suse, and so on.

But it really is very deliberately filling in a gap between Fedora and Ubuntu. With a "full desktop" style, even for small screens (with economical menus, instead of using maximus, like Ubuntu did for a long while). But while including minimal but practical things like minor compiz fusion effects, awn, and jupiter out of the box. Then in the back, it's a fork off Fedora 14, with the newest kernels and modules for hardware support - but without the need to download new compilations of packages with each upgrade, etc. While being stable, always, UI and otherwise. And not introducing weird new things because it looks cool in a screenshot. Also doesn't maintain some sort of package nazism about licenses. So that it is easy to use on a laptop for actual work, without needing to wipe the install every couple of weeks..

Also is practical to do tweaks, since you're not going to struggle with a new script-structure in the setup every major version. That kind of thing..

So no, it's not just a mash-up between fedora and ubuntu. There are a couple of very good reasons why this turned up, and why it's.. spiritually.. between the two "major" distros.

Since I've been tapping away so much anyway.. Fewt also happens to be on the right side when it comes to putting processor control and power/suspend states in the user-space, instead of kernel-space. Has a very good and solid grasp of exactly why this makes sense.

Frankly, we have a lot of significant linux-people who love tweaking kernel-modules manually, and can't imagine that not everyone likes that. And keep having this idea that "if you don't like my decision, for whatever reason, then you can make your own distro from scratch".

But I don't have time to do that, even if I know how. Basically, you ignore the problems a distro has, find the easiest workaround, and then just adapt. Because you don't have the time to do it properly.

So there's a reason why this distro exists, just pointing that out.

 

I didn't say it was a spiritual sequel. We don't actually disagree on any of this, we're just not communicating well. When I was saying spiritual hybrid, I meant that Fuduntu takes some queues from Ubuntu and other queues from Fedora. Nothing more than that, nothing technical at all. When you said "spiritually between", you meant the same thing as I did when I said "spiritual hybrid".

The only reason I used the phrase "spiritual sequel", was that I was trying to help define and give context to the term "spiritual" in "spiritual hybrid". The reason I was using that phrase at all was to distinguish it from a literal or technological hybrid, which is what you seemed to think I was saying originally, which I was not.

whew!

 

Allright, allright..