Talk:Lubuntu

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Linux (Rated Start-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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Userbox[edit]

Wikipedia users who use Lubuntu (or even Ubuntu with the optional LXDE desktop package installed) may want to add this userbox to their user page:

Code Result
{{User:Ahunt/Lubuntu}}
Lubuntu.png This user contributes using Lubuntu.
Usage

- Ahunt (talk) 19:36, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

  • very cool thanks for making the userbox! RP459 (talk) 21:25, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Glad you like it! - Ahunt (talk) 22:28, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Name meaning[edit]

Is it really important to say that Lubuntu means absolutely nothing? It's quite obvious that Lubuntu is LXDE+Ubuntu. 120.28.71.31 (talk) 15:23, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

People are going to ask what it means. - Ahunt (talk) 20:46, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
It's absolutely a reasonable thing to state. --Falcorian (talk) 23:40, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
On 30 December 2010 User:70.247.172.193 added a dubious tag to the name explanation with the edit summary "yes, the name is a portmanteau, but it's unclear the ACRONYM LXDE or WORD ubuntu have significance to Lubuntu; if they do, needs a cite". I have to admit I don't know what this person is trying to say or ask by this statement and tag. The sentence just explains where the term Lubuntu comes from, it makes no assertion that it has any significance beyond a name. I will see if I can source it. - Ahunt (talk) 22:07, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Okay I have sourced each part of the statement and removed the tag, but if I haven't understood the problem then feel free to explain it here. - Ahunt (talk) 22:50, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Pre-release?[edit]

I'm not sure if it's right to call a "pre-release" version of Lubuntu the simple availability of the LXDE desktop :-/ Lubuntu aims to be a complete selection of lightweight packages and not only the LXDE desktop, no? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amine Brikci N (talkcontribs) 12:29, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Well that is why it is listed as a "pre-release" rather than a "release". This is similar to Xubuntu. - Ahunt (talk) 12:40, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

GNOME Stuff Included[edit]

See this ubuntuforums thread for more information on what I mean. This includes GDM (so far) as the Display/Login Manager instead of LXDM. But this might change. 24.241.229.253 (talk) 16:40, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Seems recently that LXDM has been put back in. 24.241.229.253 (talk) 23:24, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Release status of 10.04[edit]

Status on blog is "stable beta" [1] [2], so there is no, repeat no out of beta release for 10.04. Reading between the lines, they are aiming for 10.10 as the first out of beta, which is why they say 10.04 is not LTS, this release is merely the last beta, and it will never be out of beta and supported along with LTS. As such, I will fix the article so this is clear. Widefox (talk) 11:08, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Lubuntu for needy families[edit]

"Lubuntu has found a particular use .. for charitable distribution to needy families"

None of the cited articles actually say that. I would have thought that a better reason to use Lubuntu is the ability to run from a USB device and better security. emacsuser (talk) 13:20, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Reference 8 is all about Fosdick's use of Lubuntu as part of FreeGeek, a charitable organization that collects old computer from donors and distributes tham in their communities to needy families. "Lubuntu fulfills an important role in the PC ecosystem. While these computers have virtually no resale value they still provide value if placed and used appropriately. If you have computer up to ten years old you don't use, please donate it to a charity like FreeGeek that will reuse it." - Ahunt (talk) 13:46, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

No 64-bit Lubuntu?[edit]

I see there is no mention of Lubuntu being 32-bit only, as I'm not aware of a 64-bit version of Lubuntu.

If ref links can be found this would be worth mentioning. TurboForce (talk) 10:39, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Quite true, let me see if I can find a source for that. - Ahunt (talk) 12:33, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Done. - Ahunt (talk) 17:36, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. It's really good. :) TurboForce (talk) 20:38, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Lubuntu 12.10 Screenshot[edit]

The picture attached in the section and also at the start of the article is a mock-up, not a real representative of the lubuntu 12.10 desktop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neo 1in (talkcontribs) 05:10, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

This image is on en.wikipedia.org, whereas there is a file on Commons that shows Lubuntu 12.10, which could be substituted, however they have exactly the same name and the software defaults to the local version. I can't move either version to a new name, but the local one is flagged to be moved to commons. If it is moved it will have to be renamed and then we can resolve this and use the commons image instead. - Ahunt (talk) 19:19, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Ubuntu Lite[edit]

Why is Ubuntu Lite redirecting to this article? --79.224.254.3 (talk) 12:34, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't known. --79.224.225.4 (talk) 11:57, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Why do you think people come to this particular page??[edit]

I would venture to say that people who have old laptops or less than adequate hardware, are the ones who come here for Advice, Tips, Knowledge, Facts and Confidence.

While it may come first to mind for the Initialized, or be most entertaining for the regulars and the Afficionados, most of the customers for whom this page ostensibly exists in the first place, are those who want to know whether this or that version of a Lightweight-Ubuntu works on their hardware.

Many of us would really appreciate when this page gets its focus together on these issues.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.128.29 (talk) 22:27, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

What specifically are you interested in seeing added to the article? - Ahunt (talk) 23:27, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Pronunciation[edit]

The page for Ubuntu the OS says it is pronounced /ʊˈbʊntuː/ uu-BUUN-too. The page for Ubuntu the philosophy says it us pronounced /uːˈbʊntuː/ oo-BUUN-too; Zulu/Xhosa pronunciation: [ùɓúntʼú]. Is Lubuntu different? The version offered in the article is /luːˈbuːntuː/ loo-BOON-too, but that just looks like a US high schooler's idea of pronunciation and the IPA. Are all of these "correct"? Tsinfandel (talk) 09:05, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

If I recall correctly the pronunciation on this page was taken from the Ubuntu page, but it looks like that page has been updated since then. This one could be updated as well, so I will do that. Thanks for pointing it out. - Ahunt (talk) 14:30, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Wouldn't it be better if we'd use the international phonetics alphabet (descended from Rumic) as these types of "pronunciations" would differ with each speaker for example the English "a" in most of the world is "e", the English "o" is an "a" in most of the world, the "i" becomes "ai"/"ay", the "u" becomes an "o", Etc. reading "loo" for a Filipino (where English is the national language and spoken by 92% of the population) would be pronounced as "lo-oh" but an American would read "lo-oh" as "lu-uh", this is why we have a standardized spelling, and most Wikipedia pages use the international phonetics, though far from perfect almost anything is better than "phonetic English" (which the Anglophones write as "funetik" while others would replace the "u" with an "o" and vice versa usages of "u" become "oo" and "o" become "a(h)"/"a(w)") you get the jist. In fact the Ubuntu article starts with /ʊˈbuːntʊ/.
Sincerely, --Namlong618 (talk) 13:56, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
IPA seems to be the standard on Wikipedia, but I have to admit I personally find it hard to use. - Ahunt (talk) 15:16, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

16.04 release status[edit]

If it has been released - and today is the day it was expected to be released - no-one's told the people in charge of the website: that's still saying 15.10 is the latest version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.26.44.251 (talk) 12:50, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

I already have it downloaded from here. The website is slow, as usual. - Ahunt (talk) 12:54, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Website change (.net > .me)[edit]

I've had a quick look but can't find info on when or why (or if!) the official website changed from lubuntu.net to lubuntu.me, however: (a) The main Ubuntu webpage at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu links to the .me one, and (as the comment above says) only the .me one has the latest 16.04. (b) The lubuntu.me one explicitly links (on http://lubuntu.me/links/) the lubuntu.net one as being official. (I made some edits, but have now reverted them as it's really unclear to me what the real situation is). Snori (talk) 20:58, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

You are quite right, it is really unclear! Oddly the page at http://lubuntu.me/links/ lists lubuntu.net as the "Official Lubuntu website". I hope they delete one of them and redirect it to the official site. In the meantime listing them both in the info box is probably best. - Ahunt (talk) 01:02, 25 April 2016 (UTC)