Talk:CrunchBang Linux

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Linux (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linux, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Linux on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I have updated the "Editions" section, because now that 9.04 has been removed from the project's website, the Lite edition is no longer available. --Jswf (talk) 16:30, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Good Idea. I have taken the liberty to reword it to point out that the removal from the website was due to Ubuntu 9.04 reaching it's end of life. (talk) 00:03, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

I added several new sentences. Now that CrunchBang Statler is based exclusively on Debian, it's no longer necessary to distinguish it from Ubuntu. The "Comparison with Ubuntu" section should be modified. Arpadapo (talk) 03:41, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

In preparation for the release of Waldorf when Debian Wheezy is finally let loose, I'm currently doing a wholesale edit/upgrade/modification of the page. Anyone wishing to help can join in. Larrycafiero (talk) 00:45, 12 March 2013 (UTC)


The lead states: "#" is pronounced "crunch", and "!" is pronounced "bang" in unix speak. Since when? For such a prominent assertion in the lead that ought to be backed up. Shebang suggests it is not. RichardOSmith (talk) 21:12, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. In the US at least, "#" is "hash". Not sure whether other English-speaking countries use "crunch", but it seems the assertion should simply be removed unless evidence is provided. Yworo (talk) 21:13, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
I have now removed it. RichardOSmith (talk) 17:18, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
I've heard of "bang" for "!", but never "crunch". "Bang" is apparently synonymous with "factorial" in mathematics. I can't cite any sources for this though. Wilsonsamm (talk) 16:35, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Found that this page suggests hash can be pronounced bang And ddg uses bang for ! bang syntax — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:17, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

new version and new version with backports available[edit]

This should be also mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:22, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Outdated comparison with Ubuntu[edit]

For quite a lot of time Ubuntu doesn't come with GNOME panel, they use Unity. Same goes for GNOME panel. Overall, since CrunchBang is not based on Ubuntu, the point of this comparison is not evident. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 01:44, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Outdated Ubuntu infobox[edit]

Ought to be removed form page now, since #! is straight-ahead Debian and no longer based on Ubuntu? -- (talk) 17:21, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


a bit detailing how #! lacked an application manager, control panel, or a "start" menu, because it obviously has at least two of those, and "start menu" is kinda irrelevant to a linux distro. (talk) 02:38, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree. It was unsourced and tagged, so as per WP:V anyone can remove it at any time as a result. - Ahunt (talk) 10:23, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Search on Wikipedia for 'crunch bang' does not show CrunchBang Linux[edit]

I heard about CrunchBang Linux today and searched for it on Wikipedia by searching 'crunch bang' in the search box. Nothing came up GPL related.

( search results: )

Suggest having at least one 'crunch bang' string on the page. (ie. separated by a space) to allow a search hit. Perhaps a naming section: "CrunchBang is named after the Ascii characters for crunch bang (#!) , the first characters in a shell script" (talk) 09:44, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

 Done, Crunch Bang and Crunch bang now redirect to this article. As far as the explanation for the name goes, as per WP:V we need a ref to cite to add that. Do you have one? Ahunt (talk) 11:21, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

A future for CrunchBang?[edit]

Toward its end, this thread points the reader toward this thread on Bunsen Labs Linux, which in turn points the reader toward this at Github, which is very new indeed. I don't think that anything about this, or about any other effort to continue #!, should be added to the WP article for two weeks or longer; and I write this here in the talk page mostly as a memo to my later self (or to anybody else). -- Hoary (talk) 07:39, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Two items on this:
-Ahunt (talk) 15:27, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
And "Resurrección: Crunchbang++, Bunsen Labs y Bodhi Linux 3.0.0", "CrunchBang++ (#!++) nicht der Nachfolger von CrunchBang (#!), sondern Bunsen Labs", and (the best of any I've seen so far) "CrunchBang: The Rest of the Story". But let's wait a few more days. -- Hoary (talk) 23:35, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Phoronix covered CrunchBang++ too. Smile4ever (talk) 09:27, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Thank you Smile4ever for the well-intended link -- but this is pretty feeble stuff. Quote: "CrunchBang Linux was closing up shop since this OpenBox-powered distribution based on Debian no longer offered much value thanks to improvements to upstream Debian and other distributions coming along over the years." That's pretty much what Corenominal said, but I put it down to modesty: I haven't noticed others agreeing. And what follows it is an uncritical regurgitation of what the "CrunchBang++" people say (person says?) about their own (so far) vaporware. This non-article cites another Phoronix article, which simply recycles what Corenominal wrote. Let's wait a little longer. -- Hoary (talk) 09:42, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

A future for CrunchBang ++?[edit]

Somebody (contributions) removed

No "News" or update has appeared since then (as of late September 2015),<ref>Any news would seem likely to appear in "[ News]", CrunchBang++.</ref> so it is unclear if the project is still active.

with no explanation. I believe that what this says is still correct, so I've reinstated it. If there's a good reason to re-remove it, please divulge this here. -- Hoary (talk) 23:00, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

It was removed again with no explanation, so I have reverted it and asked the IP editor to discuss here instead. It is worth noting that seem to be "down" right now. It might be worth checking back in a while and see if the website is gone, as I think that would support the notion that the project is done, too. - Ahunt (talk) 23:49, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
The website is in fact up. :) Smile4ever (talk) 15:26, 9 February 2016 (UTC)