Ubuntu wasn’t even planned when I was already “practicing” on Debian. However, the very first distribution I saw was Red Hat running on a gateway at my former workplace. I didn’t configure it, but sometimes I had to reboot.
I think it was the Free Software Foundation’s support for Debian that elevated it.
I don’t know about that - but Debian had the reputation as being the best - if a little tough to install. I think the ‘tough to install’ part was exaggerated - it was figuring out what to do next that was tough! Compared to TAMU (a six inch stack of floppies!) it was easy (ncurses) - and I didn’t even have to set the refresh rate and vblank interval on my ATI card!
I too think that Ubuntu brought Debian along for the ride - before that it seemed to be a ‘pro user’ setup. As for Ubuntu itself, I’m pretty sure that what got them going was the quality of the forum support, and the user community it had. Never seen anything like it before - and it sure beat googling error numbers like Windows! I practically lived on the ubuntuforums for a number of years - and now I’m here - not a coincidence! Good job EnOS team!
I got sold on debian early due to apt, honestly. At the time RPM wasn’t doing any dependency checking, so it’s pretty easy to get somebody to try it out if you promise them the end of dependency hell. By the time it was added to rpm, the apt train had left the station. Chooo Choooo.
Ubuntu picking debian just makes sense when you look how far ahead their infrastructure was. They could just refine the UI experience by concentrating on one GUI and really refining it (and then throwing it out and making a new one…and then throwing that out and then…) and relax some of the philosophical hangups (Aka, remember when Firefox was Ice weasel on debian due to the fact debian didn’t want to use the firefox logo because it was trademarked)
I feel like debian’s pure stance on intellectual property, while important to the ecosystem as a whole, also played a role in hindering their wider “mass market” desktop adoption.
At least that’s my take anyway.
I tried that, but in the end two separate drives are still connected.
I have a w10 and a Mx Linux drive, both attached on a sata line.
But when I update the grub from Mx, the w10 will be in the menu.
MX Linux’s stable repo also includes the grub-customizer application, give it a try. Last time, it was also useful for me when I had to delete one of the Grub menu entries, which wasn’t so convenient with the built-in MX Tools.
I heard that grub-customizer can cause more problems, particularly if used incorrectly… Not trying to start a flame war just repeating what I’ve heard from others…
Yep not really suited on Arch systems can cause more problems that its worth
Yes, I know that grub customizer can be a pita so I won’t use that.
If there isn’t a way to keep those disks separated I think I’ll just remove that Windows disk again.
I use it only once in a while when I’m updating my satnav.
I’ve heard such opinions related to Ubuntu-based distributions. Personally, I have no bad experience with it.
I’m not 100% sure what your issue is… But couldn’t you have a windows VM in MX to update your satnav?
What’s wrong with the W10 being added to its menu after updating Grub?
By the way, if we’ve talked about Debian before, what do you think about the reasons why MX Linux became popular? Why are more and more people choosing this as their operating system over Ubuntu / Linux Mint?
In my opinion, although MX Linux is based on the more conservative Debian, its built-in tools make it even more convenient to use than Ubuntu, which is widely considered the most user-friendly.
My desktop is too weak to run it in a VM.
I’ve had that before and it took a day to boot Windows.
I’m keeping them separated using rEFInd and have them on separate drives. But I think if you use rEFInd will be easier for you.
I have a Windows XP VM for my GPS navigation updates. Window XP runs with less than 500MB RAM, so it should run pretty well with 1-1,5GB if you can spare that much.
Refind is uefi only isn’t it?
My desktop has a bios.
And XP? Where would I find an Xp iso?
And I’m not sure if the app to update my nav runs on xp…
I stumbled upon this in another forum. Maybe of some interest to some.
https://frontpagelinux.com/articles/guide-through-history-of-unix-linux-everything-you-need-to-know/
rEFInd should be able to work in BIOS mode too.
Quote: “rEFInd supports booting legacy OSes”.
But note: On UEFI-based PCs, rEFInd defaults to scanning for EFI, but not for BIOS, boot loaders. If you want to launch BIOS-mode OSes from rEFInd, you must edit the scanfor line in refind.conf, as described on the Configuring the Boot Manager page.
You can try editing refind.conf (usually in /boot/efi/EFI/refind ):
Uncomment the scanfor line and add hdbios to the options. This will tell rEFInd to activate its support for booting BIOS-mode OSes.
A possibility: