PDA

View Full Version : Which major distros?


uRock
June 3rd, 2010, 06:32 AM
Which major distros do not use Plymouth? Or would it be easier to ask which ones do, then avoid them?

Why do I ask this? I am not trolling. I am looking for an OS that isn't using Plymouth.

Thanks,
Ronnie
BoneKracker
June 3rd, 2010, 06:38 AM
Gentoo doesn't use it, for one.

I have no idea, but I would suspect that Fedora (and all the Fedora ducklings), and Ubuntu (and all the Ubuntu ducklings) may be the only ones using it.
2cute4u
June 3rd, 2010, 07:06 AM
Another option, would be to just ubinstall it.
Spr0k3t
June 3rd, 2010, 07:17 AM
It's not as easy as you might think.


Plymouth now has a hard dependency on mountall thus trying to remove Plymouth would remove half the OS. The advice is, if you don't want a graphical boot then uninstall any plymouth themes.
NightwishFan
June 3rd, 2010, 07:25 AM
Fedora and Ubuntu use Plymouth, and Debian has it in Unstable/Experimental, but it is not default installed. (Frankly it doesnt work yet anyway).
uRock
June 3rd, 2010, 07:25 AM
I do not think so


:(



?


Fedora and Ubuntu use Plymouth, and Debian has it in Unstable/Experimental, but it is not default installed. (Frankly it doesnt work yet anyway).
Agreed. My system was running great for weeks, then out of the blue it started trying to boot into safe graphics mode with every boot. I have been forced to either run Windows or Peppermint until I get a replacement installed. I have been thinking about Arch, but I am not sure it is right for me.
BoneKracker
June 3rd, 2010, 07:26 AM
It's not as easy as you might think.

That's ridiculous. No package manager should rip packages out unless there is nothing left on the system that depends upon them. Maybe he means "mountall has a hard dependency on plymouth"?

I don't use Ubuntu, but unless I am misunderstanding this, I'd bet this is either mis-stated or easily worked around with a simple apt command that causes the otherwise orphaned package to be considered user-selected.
tjwoosta
June 3rd, 2010, 07:27 AM
Which major distros do not use Plymouth? Or would it be easier to ask which ones do, then avoid them?

Why do I ask this? I am not trolling. I am looking for an OS that isn't using Plymouth.

Thanks,
Ronnie

Well.. Arch, Gentoo, Slackware, Crux, Sorcerer, and LFS to name a few. Any do it yourself distro obviously. Probably many others that aren't do it yourself.
TironN
June 3rd, 2010, 07:28 AM
Arch? I'm not sure though.
Spr0k3t
June 3rd, 2010, 07:33 AM
That's ridiculous. No package manager should rip packages out unless there is nothing left on the system that depends upon them. Maybe he means "mountall has a hard dependency on plymouth"?

I don't use Ubuntu, but unless I am misunderstanding this, I'd bet this is either mis-stated or easily worked around with a simple apt command that causes the otherwise orphaned package to be considered user-selected.

That's what I was thinking as well. When I get some free time, I'm going to dupe one of my VMs and test it.
NightwishFan
June 3rd, 2010, 07:42 AM
Plymouth is good because it supports kms, which most major drivers will soon rely on.
BoneKracker
June 3rd, 2010, 08:22 AM
That's what I was thinking as well. When I get some free time, I'm going to dupe one of my VMs and test it.

Well, if he meant it the other way around (mountall has a hard dependency on plymouth), then the statement makes sense. I don't know if such a dependency is likely, since I don't have mountall.

By the way, now that I look it up, that seems like a bad idea to me -- just defaulting to mounting local filesystems willie-nillie because they don't happen to be listed in the fstab? Is this a good idea? Maybe it makes it easier for newly-converted Windows users who are dual-booting to get at their Windows files, but this strikes me as not only an inconvenience over the long haul but a potential security problem. It's like "opt out" mounting of everything. Maybe I don't understand.
mkvnmtr
June 3rd, 2010, 12:22 PM
I have a Debian install that does not use plymouth. It is xfce4 but just like the same install on Ubuntu. The difference is it uses about a third of the resources.
wojox
June 3rd, 2010, 12:25 PM
openSUSE is real good if you like KDE.
98cwitr
June 3rd, 2010, 02:33 PM
yeah i accidentally my machine by uninstalling plymouth...gives you a cool warning beforehand though :)
BoneKracker
June 3rd, 2010, 10:05 PM
Personally, I prefer to see what's going on as I boot, so I don't like boot splash screens -- they just prevent you from seeing what's happening.
RedSquirrel
June 3rd, 2010, 10:13 PM
Well, if he meant it the other way around (mountall has a hard dependency on plymouth), then the statement makes sense.

mountall (http://packages.ubuntu.com/lucid/mountall) does indeed have a hard dependency on plymouth.

Remove plymouth destroying system (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/plymouth/+bug/531331)

This post (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=9142673&postcount=10) from RAOF (http://ubuntuforums.org/member.php?u=31330) (Ubuntu dev) is interesting as well:


Plymouth is not just the splash; it's also the way that the initscripts interact with the user (such as cryptsetup needing you to enter a passphrase, or fsck asking what to do), and sets up other things.

It's not just the splash.In summary, plymouth cannot be removed. :)
BoneKracker
June 3rd, 2010, 10:47 PM
Okay, then what we have here is a package management system that behaves very badly. I'm far from being an expert on package management systems, but this behavior seems grossly inefficient to me. I will just assume that the apt developers are smarter than I, and that I don't fully understand the situation.

More importantly, I think this is questionable architecture. This shows a lack of modularity. One should be able to remove ones boot splash (which performs one function) without destroying the system. This is supposed to be Linux, not Windows.
NightwishFan
June 3rd, 2010, 10:58 PM
This is just the way it was packaged. I am willing to bet it could be done differently. I know of no such issues on Debian where dpkg/apt originated.
SunnyRabbiera
June 3rd, 2010, 11:21 PM
openSUSE, PClinux and Mepis might be good options.
kevin01123
June 3rd, 2010, 11:50 PM
Okay, then what we have here is a package management system that behaves very badly. I'm far from being an expert on package management systems, but this behavior seems grossly inefficient to me. I will just assume that the apt developers are smarter than I, and that I don't fully understand the situation.

More importantly, I think this is questionable architecture. This shows a lack of modularity. One should be able to remove ones boot splash (which performs one function) without destroying the system. This is supposed to be Linux, not Windows.

The Ubuntu devs hard coded Plymouth that way. Try Debian if you want the apt system without these types of problems.