Linked by Tarun Agnani on Thu 5th Aug 2004 18:45 UTC
Linux Yoper Linux V2 was released a few weeks ago (July 13, 2004). After reading the release announcement on Yoper's website, I decided I had to try it. Yoper claims that version V2 "is the fastest Out-of-the-Box Linux system in the World".
Order by: Score:
Using it now!
by Matt on Thu 5th Aug 2004 18:59 UTC

I'm using yoper linux right now!

It's a great distro, with most popular packages put into their own apt repository, and supports the popular RPM format as well. I am using Opera on it now, with java (which came preinstalled) and flash (which was easy to install), and listening to music on amaroK. The Beta I'm using has KDE 3.3 as well.

firewire
by PdC on Thu 5th Aug 2004 19:11 UTC

"Network: Onboard 1394 Net Adapter connected directly to the Internet" sweet ;)

anyway, thats a funny distro; Using Slackware's packages tools with RPM packages.

Yoper Never Worked For Me
by enloop on Thu 5th Aug 2004 19:33 UTC

Appreciate the review. My recent experience with Yoper was a bit different.

I've installed a bunch of Linux flavors over the years, but tend to spend most of my time with Slackware. Yoper's installation seemed too half-baked for novices, but too limiting for experienced users. In my case, I want to place my /usr/local and /home partitions on a second drive. I'd prefer to use fdisk to do that. Yoper doesn't give me that option. (To be fair, other distros share this failing.)

I'll second your comments about lack of control over lilo, and the lack of information about what is actually installed.

And the bit about being allowed to use "only" two partitions is nonsense, of course.

Simplifying an installation by eliminating choice is appropriate in some cases, but Yoper really should include an option for a "hands-on" install.

In the end, I was unable to coax Yoper to install in usable form. I tired the Yoper forum, but got irritating lectures suggesting I was obligated to start coding fixes myself.

FWIW, I've been using MunjoyLinux for a few weeks (www.munjoylinux.org). This is yet another Debian variation via Knoppix, but it has the best display quality of any distribution I've ever used, period. Munjoy is also compiled for 686's, installs in about 10 minutes, and boots fast. (It's install routine suffers from the same simplicity as Yoper's, but has the advantage of making sense and working.) Munjoy is a work-in-progress, and annoyances do show up, but I think it is very much worth checking out.

QUOTE:
Prelinking is a way to speed up loading of dynamic libraries because there is some overhead with locating these libraries.


Well, I sure hope he means locating symbols, not the libraries themselves (as prelink pretty much caches symbol lookup results), as per ftp://people.redhat.com/jakub/prelink/prelink.pdf .

Also gentoo supports prelinking:
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/prelink-howto.xml

And always strips packages by default unless you use
RESTRICT=nostrip
inside the ebuild, or add it to your FEATURES= in make.conf

As for optimizations, most likely Gentoo would provide more assuming you configured your make.conf correctly.

Not that I'm saying Gentoo is better, just that it shouldn't sound like this concept is unique...

-B

Focus on installation
by RW on Thu 5th Aug 2004 19:54 UTC

Why do all reviews focus some much on installation? That has to be the least important part of any OS. Nearly all Linux distros have installation down to a T. Hell even Debian's new installer is easier than Windows XP. Although many won't agree I think OpenBSD and NetBSD's installers are both easier than the WinXP installer.

Two Partitions?
by Rick on Thu 5th Aug 2004 19:55 UTC

OK, I'm confused. Can this distro be installed on a drive that already contains other partitions (i.e., Mandrake, WinXP, swap, and a fat32 data partition)? If so, do I simply have to set up the partitioning myself prior to running the Yoper install? Or does the two partition warning simply mean that the whole distro goes to a single partition of my choosing, with a second partition used for swap?

Yoper V2
by Cheapskate on Thu 5th Aug 2004 19:58 UTC

i got it, i use it on occasion but not often, my only problem is this computer and most likely not Yopers fault, this box has USB ports like crazy, 12 of them 6 are USB-2.0 and other distros kind of choke on em too, so i have to use a boot parameter of yos nousb

Yoper v2 is nice!
by Mr. Banned on Thu 5th Aug 2004 20:03 UTC

I've been running it for about 3 weeks or so now. It's VERY fast (not that Yoper was ever slow, but it's noticably faster than v1), and it found and correctly set up my Radeon 9600 with dual monitors!! No other distro has done this (Suse 9 came close, but I still had to manually tweak the XF86Config-4 file).

Yoper v2 is very polished, looks great, and comes with probably 80-90% of what the average desktop user will want pre-installed, while providing all the neccesary tools to compile whatever else you may want from scratch.

Codeweaver v3 works perfectly on it (including inserting new menu items, something that's often failed on other systems, with earlier versions of Codeweavers, so I'm not sure if it's Yoper-specific, or Codeweaver v3-specific).

Yoper also seems to have cleaned up it's act as far as customer support and such goes. I was one of their more vocal critics a couple of years ago, but rather than go into past problems, let's focus on the now: Yoper is a highly polished, desktop ready Linux distro. Try it out & see for yourself!!

The ONLY downside I can find to Yoper isn't really a downside: A lack of pre-compiled Yoper-specific software. It would be more of a problem if Yoper didn't provide you with all the tools to compile from source, but they do. If you want something that's not included as part of the default setup, simply download the source, ./configure, make, and make install. Easy!

I was actually going to write an in depth review for this once I installed it, but instead chose to focus on other projects (I knew it wouldn't be a secret for too long!).

Seriously... It's worth your time to check this release out. I'm just surprised that more vendors aren't tweaking their distro's as much as Yoper has. It definately has a positive impact on the desktop experience!

Changing distros all the time
by dr_gonzo on Thu 5th Aug 2004 21:18 UTC

There seem to be lots of Linux users who regularly try out different distros. Is this saying something about Linux, i.e. no distro so far has been 100% satisfying or is it that some people actually have a hobby of installing distros?

If it's the first point, then why don't they try out something different? No matter what distro you choose, you're gonna have, more or less, the same software choices and once you've got stuff set up, you don't really need to niggle around in the OS's underpinnings so all distros are essentially the same.

If it's the second point, well, aren't you wasting your time? I mean, installing an OS is hardly the most exciting thing to do, especially now as distros are getting easier and easier to install and are thus less and less involving. If you like to muck about with computers, why not try and learn a new programming language? You'll actually learn new things and you may get a job out of it ;)

I'm not trolling here, just curious, that's all.

RE: Changing distros all the time
by Cheapskate on Thu 5th Aug 2004 21:32 UTC

same reason a man climbs a mountian, "because its there"

i used to be a redhat user until Slackwware got my favour.

its all about choice, what do you get with windows (no choice)..

re: Dr. gonzo
by djn on Thu 5th Aug 2004 21:34 UTC

I used to do this, partly because I wanted to see what each one had to offer (even if I'm happy with one, another might be better), partly for curiosity, and partly for some unidentifiable factor. It's probably like test driving cars, or something. Even if you find one you like, you might still want to try the others, just, well, because.

I've settled down with *mumble*[1] though. I think it's related to the realization that deep down, all distributions are alike. You can coax them into doing what you want, the only difference is how hard it is.
It's easy to shape and maintain, even if the initial setup might be more work than just accepting a package from another distro.

[1] Name elided so we won't go off discussing the OS in question.

Re: Two Partitions?
by Ariszló on Thu 5th Aug 2004 22:01 UTC

Yes, Yoper can be installed next to other distributions. I have it along with Slackware, Conectiva and Xandros. They all use the same swap partition. Yoper, like any other distro, is easiest to install if you prepare a spare partition for it before installation but you may as well use cfdisk during installation.

Re: Yoper Never Worked For Me
by Ariszló on Thu 5th Aug 2004 22:05 UTC

While you are stuck with two partitions during installation, you can later add more partitions by editing fstab.

Hmm...
by leo on Thu 5th Aug 2004 22:41 UTC

It sounds promising, but a minute to boot? My Debian installation that has been pounded on for 2 years and has all sorts of stuff installed boots in 1:14 from Grub to fully loaded KDE.

For a distro that makes such a big deal about speed, a minute plus 2-5 seconds for KDE is decidedly unimpressive.

I'm guessing most of the speed improvements are from prelinking KDE. It does make a big difference for KDE apps. The other optimizations are insignificant for most applications.

Re: Changing distros all the time
by leo on Thu 5th Aug 2004 22:47 UTC

It is the elusive search for the "Perfect OS" which unfortunately doesn't exist. Believe me, if there were multiple flavours of Windows I would have tried them too.

Unless you really have a garbage OS/Distro, I've basically come to the conclusion that whatever you're using is probably the best that you'll get just because you have already configured it for your needs, a feature a new OS will never have.

Yoper is pretty good!
by andrew on Thu 5th Aug 2004 23:22 UTC

I was none too impressed with the first release of Yoper, and with the various issues around it at the time. But now I would urge everybody who might still be weary to not let the past prejudice them agains Yoper of today. It is a good distro.
Installation is a snap, performance very good, and Apt makes management of software easy.
I also think Yoper strikes right balance between simplicity and features.
Take the installer for example: yes, it limits you to one partition, but it does allow a selection of filesystems, unlike many 'easy distros' which make choice for you (and that choice is usually ext3, to my dismay). It doesn't allow piece-by-piece choice of software, but it does have two profiles: desktop and minimal. It is text based, but where it really matters it switches to Sax2 to configure the display.
I don't think Yoper has any specific focus but it is a good all-purpose distro; do with it what you like! As a desktop, its KDE is a lot more developed than Gnome or XFce4, but they are there. If someone doesn't want KDE for example, I imagine they could start with Yoper minimal install and then apt-get Ygnome. Want a server? Start with minimal install and again, apt-get what you need. Want a desktop for a new user? I think Yoper would be quite a good choice for a beginner, because it is quite simple to use and run, but without resorting to distro-specific 'command centre' or 'wizards'.
All in all, I think I'm going to keep Yoper. Now I'll need to get another machine for distro-hopping! (yes, I can be quite happy with my system yet still keep looking around - call it curiosity, call it a hobby... It could be that as someone noted the effort could be better spent elsewhere - but that would be missing the point of having a hobby, wouldn't it?)

"fatest"? Duh....
by -- on Thu 5th Aug 2004 23:30 UTC

-Performance patches for the kernel
-Compiled with i686 against latest gcc
-Stripping
-Prelinking
-Hdparm on install

Tell me what of those things aren't being used in normal distros.

Also, they FAKE:
http://www.yoper.com/comparison/desktopcomparison.html

Check that. Not only their benchmarks are biased (ie: "Font Rendering Excellent =3 Good =2 Fair=1" "Menu Intelligence Intuitive =3 Functional = 2 Unreasonable=1" - "measure" that?) but they fake the results.

Look at the "Timing Buffer Cache Reads". For yoper it's 1279.23. Other distros get, as maximum, 821.

Those are hdparm results. Reasons why that results is faked:
o The kernel actually auto-sets the DMA, etc if the driver is good. Chances are that the driver for that machine is broken, but these days fedora and others ALSO autosets the DMA.

Then, you've comparisons of "used user memory". Some of those distros use KDE, other use gnome. Suprprisingly, yoper uses less memory than debian, despite of the fact that debian doesn't installs Xfree or any graphical environment (and since they measure "installation time" and default configurations they must measure the _default_ installation not a tweaked one)

and heck, what parameters did they fgollow then they compare "graphical quality"? Damn, IT'S ALL THE SAME LINUX. So you use prelink? Congratulations, every distro on the planet has already released their versions with it.

Worthless.

Re: "fatest"? Duh....
by andrew on Thu 5th Aug 2004 23:39 UTC

> Tell me what of those things aren't being used in normal distros.

well, quite a few distros do not optimise specifically for i686. Also something the reviewer didn't mention - Yoper's kernel includes Con Kolivas' low latency patches. I admit I do not know how much effect they have on a 2.6.7 kernel, but they are there.
Finally it bears repeating Yoper guys do not claim any patents - just that they've done some ground work for you.

Feedback please!
by xVariable on Thu 5th Aug 2004 23:53 UTC

I'm a recent Windows convert to SuSe 9.1. I've experimented with Linux in it's various guises for years, but find this newest release from SuSe to be the most polished and integrated Linux desktop I've ever used, bar none. I have some questions about Yoper 2, maybe some of you could field them for me:

1) Is YOPER's boot sequence completely graphical? SuSe is either using the graphical boot patch in 9.1, or they do an extremely effective job of hiding the terminal during boot. Heck, even their shutdown sequence is completely graphical, it's fantastic.

2) Does YOPER support suspend to disk out of the box? SuSe sort of does -- it'll work, if you change a single setting in a config file from 'no' to 'yes'. No other distro makes it that easy, and it'd be nice to know whether YOPER is similar.

3) What is the multimedia situation like in YOPER 2? This is an area where SuSe falls-down. Loyal SuSe users might find that statement incredulous but, the truth is, other distros like Fedora Core are much better at providing multimedia file support. I am constantly running into file types that I can't get to play in SuSe (Windows Media files, many MPEG 4-encoded avi's (certain DiVX and XvID revisions), even certain MPEG 1 or 2 files) and, no matter what RPMs I install to try and get those files playing, nothing works or I get, at best, audio working. In contrast, in Fedora Core 2, media type support was much more comprehensive and far easier to get working -- just download a few RPMs and *BAM*, any file I threw at it worked w/o a hitch (all Windows Media, Quicktime, Real Media and MPEG variants worked flawlessly).

Thanks for any responses, I'm really intrigued by Y2! :-)

Re: Feedback please!
by goyo on Fri 6th Aug 2004 01:43 UTC

xVariable did You actually read the review?
Because some of your questions are pointless...

For SuSe...try Mplayer...

@xVariable
by Anonymous on Fri 6th Aug 2004 01:50 UTC

The easiest way to gte some of those "extras" like dvd playing and win32-codecs is here:

http://cambuca.ldhs.cetuc.puc-rio.br/xine/

for the multimedia question
by Matt on Fri 6th Aug 2004 01:55 UTC

yes, multimedia works great.

I can watch avi mpeg and wmv files, and listen to mp3 ogg and wma files.

just poke around xine's website. xine. mplayer crashes.

@goyo
by xVariable on Fri 6th Aug 2004 01:56 UTC

If you mean the question about the graphical boot, I don't think you understand the nature of the question. The question was *how graphical* is Y2's boot sequence. IOW, is the terminal sown at all during the boot, or is it concealed at all times.

Regarding your recommendation for MPlayer: Personally I use Xine and Kaffeine. In any case, however, the choice of "middleware" (meaning Xine or MPlayer, sitting between the front-end (Kaffeine/Gxine/Totem/et al) and the supporting codecs (xvid, ffmpeg, lame, libquicktime/openquicktime, Real Player)) is irrelevant. What matters is whether there are RPMs available for the above codecs, and whether they are setup to intelligently support whatever file formats they are supposed to support.

Thanks for your wholly negative and useless response, though, it was really "appreciated"...

@xVariable
by yoper on Fri 6th Aug 2004 02:08 UTC

Yoper uses the same bootspash system as SuSE


xine and kaffeine and MPlayer are available in Yoper's apt-repository. Codecs should all be there!

@yoper
by xVariable on Fri 6th Aug 2004 02:16 UTC

Awesome! I sort of wondered if YOPER was using the same thing as SuSe (which *is* the bootsplash kernel patch?).

Let me commend you on your use of Synaptic as the package manager (here's hoping a qt version is made), and what sounds like a very complete repository of packages. I was seriously considering giving my money to SuSe, but it may turn-out YOPER will get it. I can't wait to try your distro out. :-)

yoper- selecting packages
by crawancon on Fri 6th Aug 2004 04:20 UTC

I was able to select each package i wanted from a nice list.
i honestly don't remember the "option" as it were, but it was there, and presented me with a tree-list of packages and groups they fall under, "development, system tools, multimedia.." etc. but i do believe you're right, xmms was not there, and neither was an office suite, but a few editors that it provides will work for basic users of word and such. Since this distribution was based around speed and efficiency, that sort of explains the lack of office suite, and is easily apt-get-able for people who require it. I recently installed ut2k4 on the distro just to see performance, and well, basically out of the box, gets same frame rates (+/- 10.. depending..) as direct3d, although some graphics didnt display as they do in d3d.
over all i am pleased, and for now it will remain on my system. im happy with a bleeding kernel, full package support, and general packages i use every day. (xmms, mplayer, firefox, etc..) perhaps boot times can be tweaked, i havent tried yet. i've installed fluxbox with no problems, and have a nice/responsive system up in not much time, and.. it seems stable. (?!)

from a long-time Gentoo user
by Anonymous on Fri 6th Aug 2004 04:49 UTC

I decided to give Yoper a whirl the other day, skeptical of the speed bragging. Yoper is fast, the bragging is deserved. It's noticably quicker than any distribution I've ever tried with the exception of Gentoo built from Stage 1...they're about even. Gentoo takes much longer to build and tweak though. I was annoyed with just about everything the author was annoyed with, except for the difficulty of the install. I thought it was quite simple (*cough* two partitions?). A little too simple, but coherent.

It's nice to have a distribution you can just toss on a spare partition that sets everything up automatically, almost perfectly. The fonts were nice, Konqueror loaded INSTANTLY when before I thought 2 seconds was fast before, it has apt-get and installs everything I throw at it correctly. It detected my nVIDIA card with the SuSE SaX tool perfectly and inserted the module. This is a surprisingly polished Linux/GNU for a beta. Probably one of the best niche distros I've tried next to PCLinuxOS 2k4, and GoboLinux, which I also throughly enjoyed.

@xVariable
by escapenguin on Fri 6th Aug 2004 05:01 UTC

Yoper booted plain console for me, no bootsplash, but I guess you could set it up to do it. I downloaded an early beta, so maybe it was just broken, and I didn't do much to see why it wasn't working.

If you do some poking around on SUSE's site, you'll find a link to rpms that'll install all the codecs you could ever want.

http://packman.links2linux.org/

Yoper totally smokes SUSE speed-wise. I don't understand why it takes so long to boot for everyone else either...it boots relatively quickly--under 30 seconds on this AMD Duron 650mhz.

SCSI
by Alain on Fri 6th Aug 2004 07:06 UTC

anyone got it to boot on a hard drive connected to an adaptec scsi controler?

it asks me to specify a root= before a kernel panic?

thanks

Speed
by Anonymous on Fri 6th Aug 2004 08:55 UTC

You can't be too clever if your gentoo/debian-setup takes 10 seconds to start kde. My ancient k6-2 350mhz uses half the time. Not to mention my p4 which is half that time again. Please don't blame debian and gentoo when the problem is clueless users.

Yoper - Installing and using
by KiwiPhil on Fri 6th Aug 2004 09:02 UTC

I installed Yoper last night, and will agree with many things the reviewer noted, but will add this. This installation was simple, but it lacked the information needed to make the correct decisions.
What newbies want is information about each stage and the choices that they have to make.Without this information, either on screen or in a separate installation guide. The other thing I discovered was there was no "back" option on many screens. This wasn't a big issue as the installation was so fast, I could start over again, which I did 4 times, and still had the Yoper up and running quicker than I had Mandrake, Lidranet or Fedora C2.

The first thing I noticed about Yoper was that it was not slow, in-fact it was the fastest I have seen, both Linux and Windows.

As for the application selection, It seems Yoper has taken the Microsoft appoarch of providing an operating system, and then you go an select applications you require. It would be nice to be able to select and have installed at installation application, but this will not stop me using Yoper.

All in all, Yoper seems to be a fast solid system, what more could you ask for.

KiwiPhil - Living in pommieland

Re: Changing distros all the time
by walterbyrd on Fri 6th Aug 2004 12:39 UTC

I do it because I'm trying to find a disto that works, and that I like.

I'm presently using debian/sid. Works well in many respects but I can't get xine or mplayer to work correctly. mplayer plays only in slow-motion, and xine only works with the "xshm" parameter - which makes my 1400mhz/384mb linux system play videos worse than a 75mhz/32mb win95 box. Supposedly the problem relates to my older trident driver. But I can't upgrade, and other distros work just fine with xine.

Other distros have other problems, I guess I'll just with this for a while.

Yoper supporting wireless lan?
by Torstein Finnbakk on Fri 6th Aug 2004 12:43 UTC

Is here anyone who have tried Yoper V2 and configuring any PSMCIA Wlan card?

Re: Changing distros all the time
by bin on Fri 6th Aug 2004 13:58 UTC

I do it because I'm trying to find a disto that works, and that I like.

I'm presently using debian/sid.........

Try Mepis - it's really very very good!

I just spent a couple of hours grabbing the ISO and installing Yoper, again. Contrary to my experience cited in an earlier post, it did boot successfully this time.

However, it will not stay on my machine.

To emphasize the original review's criticism of the installation routine, it is both too simplistic for a knowledgable user and too cryptic for a novice. In particular, Yoper frequently eliminates install options, yet compels the user to run through less-than-obvious dialogues to select the only available option. If there is only one option, there is no reason to ask the user to make a choice.

First, the first screen that appears after booting the CD is a Yoper logo and a "boot:" prompt. This screen should tell the user -- novice or expert -- what to do next. It does not. If only one action can be taken, then this screen should not appear and the action should be taken automatically.

This also applies to the screen that appears if you enter "Return" at the previous screen. You are told to enter "yoper" to start the install. No other options are mentioned. This is bad design. If other options are available, this screen should say so, otherwise it should never appear.

Dumping the user into cfdisk to partion a drive is clearly inappropriate for a novice, and not ideal for an expert who is frustrated by cfdisk's limitations. Since Yoper limits itself to a large root partition and a swap partition, this partitioning step should be handled automatically.

If the default reiserfs file system is selected, the raw filesystem construction dialogue is displayed and waits for the user to enter "yes". This kind of cryptic request should never be displayed to a novice. It is also unnecessary to show it to an expert, since the filesystem type has already been selected.

The package selection menu offer two choices, one is numbered as "0001" and the other as "0003". This kind of sloppiness does not build confidence in that distribution's attention to detail.

I use an Nvidia-based card and a basic 3-button ps/2 mouse which are succcessfully configured via Sax2 in SUSE 9.1. Yoper's install detected the Nvidia, but not the mouse. In fact, it detected no mouse. It did not boot to X. When I ran Sax2 manually, no mouse was detected, the mouse cursor did not move, and I had to use the cumbersome tab key to attempt to configure a mouse. This was unsuccessful.

I resorted to using xf86config to build a working, vesa-based, xf86config file. Both X and Sax2 would run after that, but it failed to detect the nvidia (I had to look up the card's PCI device ID to install it correctly), did not detect my LCD monitor, and never correctly configured the mouse wheel.

And, finally, the timezone dialogue during the install did not give me an option to tell it my machine uses GMT time, and, as a result, insisted upon misconfiguring itself.

Once launched, my intial impression is that the display quality is acceptable, but not outstanding. Windows do not move smoothly on the screen. Initial attempts to run Mozilla (which is not listed in the menu system) are confounded by an unnecessary profile dialogue that indicates a default profile is available and then claims it cannot find it.

In comparison to the distribution it replaced -- MunjoyLinux -- Yoper's install is broken; it's display is second rate, and it's speed is noticeably slower. Other folks have apparently had different experiences, but I have to conclude that this particular pie needs to go back into the oven.

Whopper
by The Daemon on Fri 6th Aug 2004 16:20 UTC

I'm gonna make a new distro called Yig Mac. Oh, and 500 packages is pretty lame compared to FreeBSD's 10000+ but whatever.

Re: Hmm... & Re: Speed
by Ariszló on Fri 6th Aug 2004 21:54 UTC

Hotplug enabled at startup or not? Makes a difference...

distro
by yoper on Sat 7th Aug 2004 03:05 UTC

Yoper is not designed to attract people wanting 10.000 packages, but then Yoper can have 10.000 packages by using packages from other distros.

Since when does size matter anyhow. Soon Yoper might have 10.000 packages (our buildserver will handle this soon), will that make a real difference? I doubt it, since my targer market does not reallu use more than 500-1000 packages.

complete wlan integration is currently being worked on for release 2.0.1.

The installer is being reworked also for release 2.0.1. This will include more explanations on each step, more choices for powerusers and the ability to add a home partition. A completely new GUI based installer will be available by the end of the year.

some mice are tricky, but 2.0.1 has new routines to fix that.

Yoper is not a replacement for other Linux distro's. Yoper does not target 5% of the computer market (linux users). Yoper does not compete with any other linux.

I love all Linuxes, that is why I created Yoper. To integrate the best of bread distro features. I also don't like M$ (90% of the computer users) and as such I will try my best to include the excellent suggestions from the review and the comments into the distro. They will make it even easier to install Yoper (a poll on our site suggests that 90% of people say Yoper was easy to install). Yoper is not designed for the Linux power user, there are plenty of alternatives out there for such a user. The power user might enjoy however that it allows him to get a base system going in no time.

I am glad that so many comments are positive and the positive critizism will be heard and followed. Thanks very much everyone!



Yoper V2
by Arkaine on Sat 7th Aug 2004 06:04 UTC

Boots to KDE in about 45 seconds for me. Noticed windows and setup lilo accordingly. The KDE desktop install is fairly free of bloat. And you can then choose to add thngs like K3b, xmms, kaffiene, openoffice, etc....

I got on the gentoo trip when they released 1.4 and I have to say that Yoper is right up with gentoo in speed, yet only takes a few minutes to install. The installer is really simple, and lacks choices to avoid confusing new users. And I'm pretty sure its M$ converts Yoper is hoping to get for the majority of its user base. Installing things is easy enough with synaptic, and while the package list is small now, it's growing. But even advanced users can appreciate the quick installer, and snappiness of the system.

There are a couple of rough spots- the SMP kernel did not work for me so I had to compile my own from yoper-smp source. Some media players are broken by the i686 optimization for some reason. ATI does not have xfree 4.4 drivers, and Sax2 is sometimes not friendly to LCD monitors.

I like Yoper so much, I'm working on turning it into a live CD as well as building Yoper rpm's. This distro has defintely caught my interest.

-Arkaine
Overclockix developer