Comments on: Lubuntu looks promising

By: Robin

Robin — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 13:48:16 +0000

U-Lite appears to be nearly dead. The latest downloadable version is based on Ubuntu 8.04 (Hardy) and the newest version has been in Beta for ever. The forums have ancient unanswered posts and almost no activity at all. Even the “What’s going on” thread is months out of date. Judging by the web site, it looks as though the project has been all but abandoned.

It’s really too bad, because U-Lite was the original LXDE/’buntu mixture. It broke some new ground and all the others that have followed are in U-Lite’s debt.

But life ain’t always fair, and fate is not kind to lone developers with little to no support, going it alone as Shae is.

But Shae has had the good sense to join and participate in the Lubuntu project herself, and I’m sure that her contributions will be awesome.

By: steve

steve — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 10:00:41 +0000

Using it right now, very nice it is too…Same resource use as Debian + LXDE ~180MB with a terminal, PCManFM, a movie and iceweasel/firefox going…This is definitely one to keep an eye on…Thanks for the heads up.

By: steve

steve — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 09:30:36 +0000

Same here!

Very nice combo indeed can get the whole lot going for well under a gig on Lenny as well.

By: Shae

Shae — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 00:45:44 +0000

Oops, I forgot, but Kmandla is well aware of U-lite and was a Forum admin (and I suppose still is although it has been a while since I have seen him on.)

By: Shae

Shae — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 00:44:45 +0000

I also hope Kmandla would check out U-lite sometime once I create an official release, but right now there would be little sense in it.

I understand your frustration stlouisubntu. You are just representing mine that I expressed several times on U-lite’s site, but I digress. I fully support the efforts of Lubuntu and am involved in a somewhat minor roll. The only ill will I harboured against them was that they seemed to have forgotten to contact me early on in their planning although they considered it. They have of course more than made up for any mess that made.

My main grievances are against Canonical who could not even reply to my email early after being notified about our previous name asking if cooperation leading to recognition was even possible.

By: Shae

Shae — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 00:39:01 +0000

I am actually somewhat excited to see their progress. I helped a little in the early package selection, but it seems that the people who were in charge of putting together the meta diverged greatly from the original plans, but that is their right. I hope the best for this project.

By: thealphanerd

thealphanerd — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 09:59:38 +0000

CrunchBang, is by default, a horribly bloated distro yet it’s fast…. on new machines. It’s pretty much Ubuntu with more Cowbell and Openbox. Don’t bother, Alternate with a good IceWM config can run more infinite loops.

By: Brian

Brian — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 09:52:30 +0000

@Timmy
>but CrunchBang doesn’t try to be light. At all.

It doesn’t? Do you mean by choice of software? There is also the Lite version. I’ve found it works well on older machines.

http://crunchbanglinux.org/forums/topic/2802/what-will-happen-to-crunchbang/

By: sector

sector — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 12:28:07 +0000

Have you installed lxde-core, right?

By: stlouisubntu

stlouisubntu — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 04:03:50 +0000

Okay, point well taken. If this actually being developed by PCMan himself, it would indeed make sense to have him develop Lubuntu. However, it still doesn’t make sense for ubuntu / Canonical to have shunned Ubuntlite / u-lite since before 8.04. Why not have supported their efforts (even consult with the LXDE developers on it) instead of completely reinvent the wheel once again (as happens so often in open source / free software communities.)