But wouldn't it nice if they could use an adapted MX snapshot tool or our Nvidia-installer? I'm not saying they have to include any of the non-free firmware or drivers that we do.malspa wrote:Not me; I'd prefer that BL remain based only on Debian Stable.Stevo wrote:Just my opinion, but I also think that Bunsen Labs missed an opportunity by not basing their still unreleased Stretch-based version on antiX/MX. They still could do it, probably, but that train is pulling out of the station.
-- Spectre and Meltdown vulnerabilities
-- Change in MX sources
-- MX Linux on social media: here
-- Mepis support still here
-- MX-17.1 Final release info here
-- antiX-17 release info here
-- Please read this first, and don't forget to add system and hardware information to posts!
-- Here are the Forum Rules
Here you can post a testimonial about why you like or love MEPIS. Include as much detail and info as you wish.
Stevo - fully agree with you about Bunsen Labs.The guys there have done a fantastic job since Crunchbangs demise,but it would make sense for them to use Antix as the base to build an openbox version on.Would save them a lot of time and hassle.
It's just my own personal preference, but... I've got both BunsenLabs and SalentOS installed here, the main attraction for me being that they're directly based on Stable and they ship with Openbox all set up. But, whatever, I've also got a Stretch installation with Openbox (and Fluxbox) (no full DE), not as quick and easy to install as BL or SalentOS, but it ain't rocket science, and it turned out quite nicely. Myself, I would not be interested in a MX/antiX-based BL, although I'm sure it could turn out well.