It’s not much different than Fedora LXDE 24. It remains a pretty bare LXDE setup that works great. It seems like it would be a great distro for a machine with low specs. In fact, I plan on trying the out in just that scenario. The only gripe I have is the lack of a gui package manager. I have no issue with popping up a terminal and running updates but without a notifications it could be easy to forget to run them. Hopefully my I’ll get to put it through a real world run through pretty soon.
Category: Redhat Based
After using OpenSUSE with Enlightenment I had high hopes for the XFCE version. As soon as I logged in though I began to worry. Where Enlightenment had a nice theme and minimal applications, XFCE had no theme and a ton of extra junk. After removing some junk and giving it a quick shine, it is now looking and working good.
First a bit of warning, I don’t regularly use openSUSE and every time I try it something happens which is a deal breaker. I remember trying it years ago when it was just called SuSE and it didn’t support the graphics card in my PC. Then during KDE4 I was told it was consistently the best KDE4 based distro. I tried it again and at that time time the repo was missing a lot of programs I needed. I attempted to install Tumbleweed roughly a month ago and I couldn’t get a working system after multiple attempts. I guess I should have read a bit closer. It seems the Live CD is not recommended for installing the distro and it is common for it not to work. This time I grabbed the net install ISO and had it install with no issues. I’m not a big Enlightenment fan but I decided to give it a go. It’s not terrible but it is still not for me. Why can’t I manually enter a file path!? I ran into some weird issues with certain icons not working without some tweaking but the software repo seems pretty decent these days. I was able to get what I needed installed with minimal fuss. Some of the quirks I’m not sure if they are an Enlightenment or OpenSUSE issue so I plan to take the OpenSUSE XFCE setup for a spin and see how that goes.
I tend to keep installers for a number of distros I like on a USB drive so I can quickly boot them up on different hardware. To do this I use Multisystem. I have been using it for quite a while and have learned it is not always the most friendly thing but it is the only program I have found that can accomplish what I want the way I want it. After testing out Fedora LXDE 24 recently I decided I wanted to keep it ready to go on my drive. I loaded it in Multisystem like normal but I kept getting an error when I tried to boot it. The error said that it could not find /fedora1/isolinux/vmlinuz0. So I checked that folder and found out that file didn’t exist and it was actually named vmlinuz (no 0 at the end). I took a quick look at the grub code and made some adjustments.
linux /fedora1/isolinux/vmlinuz0 live_locale=en_US.utf8 live_keytable= rd.live.dir=/fedora1 root=UUID=337A-2EB5 rootfstype=auto ro rd.live.image quiet rhgb rd.luks=0 rd.md=0 rd.dm=0
linux /fedora1/isolinux/vmlinuz live_locale=en_US.utf8 live_keytable= rd.live.dir=/fedora1 root=UUID=337A-2EB5 rootfstype=auto ro rd.live.image quiet rhgb rd.luks=0 rd.md=0 rd.dm=0
Looking at the code I saw initrd also had a 0 at the end. I removed the zeros from both filenames and updated grub. It then boot like normal. I just wanted to put this trick out in case anyone else ran into it. I’m still having issues getting Peppermint 7 to work with Multisystem but if I find a fix I will post it as well.
It is all the greatness of Fedora without having to deal with Gnome. It is lightweight and runs like a champ. Unfortunately it does not come with a screenshot tool or a graphical package manager. It’s not hard to search for and install a screenshot utility through dnf commands but I can see some people being lost at this point. Since this is LXDE I kept it simple and went with scrot. I also had to install gvfs-smb to get to SMB locations. While this is a great distro I would definitely not recommend it to someone new to Linux.
If you don’t need support there is no reason to use RHEL. I found CentOS to be better due to the fact I never had to mess with the stupid subscription manager. I went with the default DE for RHEL and while it looks like old Gnome, it is not. It is Gnome 3 in classic mode but it will remind you it is new Gnome. It is resource heavy and provides no benefit over MATE. Would I use RHEL in a business environment? Yes. If I was just using it at home I would go with CentOS.