update-notifier and -manager

[Stevo]

Does GRUB get the distribution name from /etc/os-release? It's part of the base-files program.

I sort of remember trying to get update-manager to work on M11. It's related to software-properties-gtk (or kde), and in the end is due to python-apt not having a template for the distro listed in lsb-release.

README.Templates:

Channel Definition
------------------

The .info files allow to specify a set of default channels that is available
in the dialog "add channel". The .info file whose name corresponds to the
LSB release name is used, e.g. 'Ubuntu.info' on a Ubuntu system.

Furthermore all .info files are used to render the channels presented in the
sources list more user friendly.


Tags
----

Suite: the name of the dist used in the repository

MatchSuite: mainly used for cdroms. defaults to Suite

ParentSuite: the channel only appears as a component of the parent suite in
the add dialog
the components/sections of the suite correspond to the ones of
the parent suite. specified components of the suite itself
are ignored

Available: determs the availabilty of the suite in the add dialog.
defaults to False

RepositoryType: does the repository contain binary or source packages

BaseURI: the base URI of the repository

MatchURI: used for identifing mirrors

Description: description of the suite. the translation is done through
gettext at runtime

Component: a component/section of the suite (ignored if ParentSuite is
set)

CompDescription: humand readable description of the component/section
(ignored if ParentSuite is set). the translation is done
through gettext at runtime

ValidMirros: A file that contains a list of mirrors

Wow typos

Basically we need a MX.info file added to a custom rebuild of python-apt, let me get the source files.

Edit: or a package or something that just adds the MX repository templates to the rest in the correct location.

Also, is MX the distro name, and MX14 the release? I think it works better that way for the future releases such as MX15.

[Jerry3904]

Also, is MX the distro name, and MX14 the release?

Yes, though a few inconsistencies have arisen over the development phase.

The big question is: is this a "distro"? Distrowatch has so far refused to list us because of our confused identity, though anti is trying another option with them today. I do not know exactly what constitutes a "distro" but doubt ATM that we are one. For some reason...

[anticapitalista]

Well we aren't a distro IMO, but a spin/respin. To me a distro has its own identity, dev team separate from othe distro projects.
MX-14 is a joint effort by 2 existing distro teams. antiX and MEPIS (or to be more precise MEPIS Community). Now, it might develop a life of its own. independently of the initial 2 distros, it might not. Who knows ...

[richb]

Well we aren't a distro IMO, but a spin/respin. To me a distro has its own identity, dev team separate from othe distro projects.
MX-14 is a joint effort by 2 existing distro teams. antiX and MEPIS (or to be more precise MEPIS Community). Now, it might develop a life of its own. independently of the initial 2 distros, it might not. Who knows ...

I am not arguing the point as I do not know for sure what it is. But I assume that is your definition. Which is probably as valid as any other. But the definitions I find do not have that reference. This is the definition I most commonly see:

From Linux.com

A Linux distribution is a collection of software applications built on top of the Linux kernel and operating system. There are many variations between distributions, as each strives to provide a unique user experience

It is no longer the case but for some years, an Ubuntu developer (Canonical employee) also developed for Kubuntu which is considered a distro

[Danum]

It is no longer the case but for some years, an Ubuntu developer (Canonical employee) also developed for Kubuntu which is considered a distro

True but Kubuntu has its own repo's, albeit they are on the Ubuntu server, but they are maintained by Kubuntu not Ubuntu,

What is MX 14 using, Debian, Antix, (both of which are distro's in there own right) and the Mepis Community repo,
If you want it as a distro, it would be Debian, plus a mx repo, that is maintained as such,
any other way and it is a remaster, as Anti has said.

And a word of advice, before you jump in with both feet, get the bugs out of it,

[richb]

It is no longer the case but for some years, an Ubuntu developer (Canonical employee) also developed for Kubuntu which is considered a distro

True but Kubuntu has its own repo's, albeit they are on the Ubuntu server, but they are maintained by Kubuntu not Ubuntu,

What is MX 14 using, Debian, Antix, (both of which are distro's in there own right) and the Mepis Community repo,
If you want it as a distro, it would be Debian, plus a mx repo, that is maintained as such,
any other way and it is a remaster, as Anti has said.

Still all that is not in distro definitions I have seen. By the way MX does have a Debian repo and the CR MX repo that is maintained as such.

[Danum]

Still all that is not in distro definitions I have seen. By the way MX does have a Debian repo and the CR MX repo that is maintained as such.

Unfortunately that is the way it is, as for the CR MX repo, what is in there, for a guess xfce, and not much else, the rest being in the Antix repo's
which makes it a remaster, which ever way you look at it.
And another thought, do the apps in the mx repo also list sources (deb-src) because if not you are heading for trouble, ask WW about that, he knows all about the implications of not providing them.

[richb]

It seems borderline to me. But I have no skin in the game whether it is a respin or a distro.

Edit: And I might add I bow to the knowledge of those who have put together respins (Danum) and distros (Anti).

[GuiGuy]

Did you both remove that file? /etc/lsb-release

?????

[Jerry3904]

What question is that you have?