From my point of view, minimal requirements are hard to define. Does it mean you can just "boot" or that you can use your OS correctly? And is the soundcard really needed in minimal requirements?
And is the soundcard really needed in minimal requirements?
Minimal requirement if the user wants to actually hear something, I guess, thanks. That has been in the Manual since the beginning, and I never really thought about it. Maybe others have a suggestion.
Production: 5.10, MX-23 Xfce, AMD FX-4130 Quad-Core, GeForce GT 630/PCIe/SSE2, 16 GB, SSD 120 GB, Data 1TB Personal: Lenovo X1 Carbon with MX-23 Fluxbox and Windows 10 Other: Raspberry Pi 5 with MX-23 Xfce Raspberry Pi Respin
So it’s a trade-off: better desktop user experience at the expense of having to do a quick fresh install (which lets you save /home if desired) when the Debian base changes, typically every 2-3 years. MX-17.x and MX-18 use the same Debian base, so an easy migration path is offered.
1.7
Maybe something like:
So there is a trade-off. You have a better desktop experience, but at the expense of doing a quick fresh installation (allowing you to save /home if desired) when the Debian base changes. Debian moves to a new Stable branch every 2-3 years. MX-17.x and MX-18 use the same Debian Stable branch, so an easy upgrade path is offered.
(maybe something like that to break it up and make the meaning clearer.)
KBD wrote: ↑Wed Jan 09, 2019 5:16 pm
This sentence seems a bit awkward to me:
Our current choice to stick with sysvinit instead of going to full systemd also interferes with that path.
Maybe something like this, break it up?
Our current choice is to stick with sysvinit. That interferes with Debian's choice of using systemd.
That changes the meaning of the sentence.
Our choice of sysvinit doesn't interfere with Debian's choice of systemd.
Our choice of sysvinit interferes with Debian's dist-upgrade path.
I know I'm biased because I wrote that bit - but please let's not sacrifice precision just for a smoother flow. Another wording that keeps the meaning the same is fine.
I agree with your recommendation of 2 GB.
Just a note, about possibilities:
I'm running MX18_386, on two 32bit netbooks:
Acer Aspire One, ZG5 from 2009.
Asus EeePC 1005HA from 2010.
Both have the following:
Atom N270, 1 GB RAM & 150 GB HDD.
They are not speed demons but are adequate for general use surfing Internet, word processor, etc. Great for traveling since they only weigh a kilo.
AntiX is a better fit on them but I like having the same general configuration as on my 64bit daily ride. Many years of Xfce usage inertia.
Suppose if I had to use a 1 GB netbook every day, l'd use antiX. :)
Thinkpad T430 & Dell Latitude E7450, both with MX-21.3.1
kernal 5.10.0-26-amd64 x86_64; Xfce-4.18.0; 8 GB RAM
Intel Core i5-3380M, Graphics, Audio, Video; & SSDs.
I agree with your recommendation of 2 GB.
Just a note, about possibilities:
I'm running MX18_386, on two 32bit netbooks:
Acer Aspire One, ZG5 from 2009.
Asus EeePC 1005HA from 2010.
Both have the following:
Atom N270, 1 GB RAM & 150 GB HDD.
They are not speed demons but are adequate for general use surfing Internet, word processor, etc. Great for traveling since they only weigh a kilo.
AntiX is a better fit on them but I like having the same general configuration as on my 64bit daily ride. Many years of Xfce usage inertia.
Suppose if I had to use a 1 GB netbook every day, l'd use antiX. :) probably with Xfce4 though I was an IceWM fan many years ago.
Actually sold the Acer yesterday, with MX-18 & WinXP. Runs much better on MX than XP.
Thinkpad T430 & Dell Latitude E7450, both with MX-21.3.1
kernal 5.10.0-26-amd64 x86_64; Xfce-4.18.0; 8 GB RAM
Intel Core i5-3380M, Graphics, Audio, Video; & SSDs.