Suggestions for 1L computer to run Emacs 2019

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
56 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Suggestions for 1L computer to run Emacs 2019

Van L
Hello,

What alternatives are there to the following:

- Mac Mini (late 2018)
- Lenovo Tiny (Model P 330)

Lambdalabs doesn’t have of product of this size
but has Ubuntu out of the box. The one thing I’d
miss leaving the Apple ecosystem is the Emacs Mac’s
convenience function Shift-Command-D for Dictionary.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestions for 1L computer to run Emacs 2019

Stefan Monnier
> What alternatives are there to the following:
>
> - Mac Mini (late 2018)
> - Lenovo Tiny (Model P 330)

I think you'll want to be more clear in what you're looking for.
A cubietruck definitely fits the 1L constraint and runs a recent Emacs
just fine, and there are hordes of similar little beasts out there.


        Stefan


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestions for 1L computer to run Emacs 2019

Van L

>> What alternatives are there to the following:
>>
>> - Mac Mini (late 2018)
>> - Lenovo Tiny (Model P 330)
>
> I think you'll want to be more clear in what you're looking for.

What I have is the Mac Mini (late 2009) and on to it GNU/Emacs runs.
Happily. The hardware consists of a twocore cpu, 8Gb ram, 256Gb SSD,
gigabit networking.

But, the operating system is no longer served as
upgradeable. Sadly. Why? my guess is the Metal™ subsystem for
accelerated graphics display won't interface with the vintage Nvidia
device driver, a marketing problem, not a software engineering
problem.

Having read [1] if I were to pick a Mac Mini cpu for GNU/Emacs, is the
i3 cpu better than i5, i7?

I am looking for hardware with "fit and finish" improving on what I
have and for the operating system to be free and open where possible.

System76, HP, ChromeOS suppliers satisfy the 1L constraint but they
don't look serious like, not even, the Apple TV puck.

> A cubietruck definitely fits the 1L constraint and runs a recent Emacs
> just fine, and there are hordes of similar little beasts out there.

The cubieboard is like the Raspberry Pi, some have the Mathematica
package. The look of them is like the fork in Toy Story 4.

--- Footnotes

[1] https://wp.me/p51SSp-dmc

--
© 2019 Van L
  gpg using EEF2 37E9 3840 0D5D 9183  251E 9830 384E 9683 B835
  "What is connectivity?" -John Sculley


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Suggestions for 1L computer to run Emacs 2019

Stefan Monnier
> What I have is the Mac Mini (late 2009) and on to it GNU/Emacs runs.
> Happily.  The hardware consists of a twocore cpu, 8Gb ram, 256Gb SSD,
> gigabit networking.
>
> But, the operating system is no longer served as upgradeable.

Odd.  My 2006 Mac Mini is still using the very latest version of the
operating system (Debian testing ;-).

> I am looking for hardware with "fit and finish" improving on what I
> have and for the operating system to be free and open where possible.

Keeping the same machine won't improve the "fit and finish", but
upgrading to Debian will definitely improve on the "free and open where
possible".   And it will save the planet a fair bit of green house gases
and pollution at the same time, so you'll get double karma points.

> System76, HP, ChromeOS suppliers satisfy the 1L constraint but they
> don't look serious like, not even, the Apple TV puck.

Indeed Apple is one of (if not *the*) most serious company in terms of
not letting their customers own "their" devices.

System76 is a joke in comparison.  For that reason, I'd go with System76
any day.  https://puri.sm/ is another one that doesn't take controlling
its customers seriously at all (tho they don't offer any desktop
machine yet, AFAIK).

>> A cubietruck definitely fits the 1L constraint and runs a recent Emacs
>> just fine, and there are hordes of similar little beasts out there.
> The cubieboard is like the Raspberry Pi, some have the Mathematica
> package.  The look of them is like the fork in Toy Story 4.

Not sure whether that means it's a good fit for your use case.
[ And not only because I haven't watched TS4.  ]
If you need something silent (and hence fanless), it's not the worst
choice and it's damn cheap.


        Stefan "hoping System76 will have fanless desktops next time he
                needs to replace his own"


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

1L? (was: Suggestions for 1L computer to run Emacs 2019)

Skip Montanaro
In reply to this post by Van L
I am unfamiliar with the term "1L", and Google wasn't much help. What
does it mean beyond "one liter"? I am familiar with "1U" as a form
factor from the olden days when computers were rack mounted (as God
intended). I haven't seen the inside of a cage in a long while though.

Thx,

Skip

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 1L?

Stefan Monnier
> I am unfamiliar with the term "1L", and Google wasn't much help. What
> does it mean beyond "one liter"?

I think he meant just that: one liter, i.e. an approximate upper limit
on the size of the machine.


        Stefan


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 1L?

Emanuel Berg-5
Stefan Monnier wrote:

>> I am unfamiliar with the term "1L", and
>> Google wasn't much help. What does it mean
>> beyond "one liter"?
>
> I think he meant just that: one liter, i.e.
> an approximate upper limit on the size of
> the machine.

Shouldn't *all* "1L machines" run Emacs
just fine?

I have an RPi3 from 2015 and it runs Emacs as
I'm typing this, and not only Emacs but the
familiar Raspbian OS, which is "Debian for the
RPi", but not exactly the real McCoy, so for
really exotic projects, I'd recommend a vanilla
Debian box with all the fixings.

Anyway the RPi, even including the case, should
be way below the 1L constraint so I'd expect
any machine significantly bigger that that to
at the very least run or favorite editor/OS
with no problems.

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 1L?

Van L
In reply to this post by Stefan Monnier
Stefan Monnier <[hidden email]> writes:

>> I am unfamiliar with the term "1L", and Google wasn't much help. What
>> does it mean beyond "one liter"?

> I think he meant just that: one liter, i.e. an approximate upper limit
> on the size of the machine.

I picked it up from the Lenovo brochureware techspecs. Perhaps this
capacity measure has origin in watercooling. The specs mention
certification for independent software vendors and that I expect means
chances are better for Debian and the like to "just work".

> Shouldn't *all* "1L machines" run Emacs
> just fine?

It takes quite a while for gnus to process L117196 on entry to
gmane.emacs.help.  And, multitasking is impossible while this is
busy. A 6core cpu with HT won't make a difference to the 4core without
HT in performance, here.

> Anyway the RPi, even including the case, should
> be way below the 1L constraint

The worry is RPi's hobbykit won't cool adequately. The bits and pieces
wearout quick, for example, the SD card, &c, &c.

--
© 2019 Van L
  gpg using EEF2 37E9 3840 0D5D 9183  251E 9830 384E 9683 B835
  "Where is the letter T?" -Joni Mitchell


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 1L?

조성빈
Looking the thread it looks like you’ve used macOS for these years and finding a new mac :-)
While many people in this list are free-software advocates and doesn’t like ‘proprietary apple software ‘ and insists on free software, Apple’s macOS is much, much helpful on tasks that you can’t solve with emacs (like web surfing).
The new Mac Mini is very powerful and the i3 processor will be sufficient to run emacs, but I would recommend the i5 processor (for daily tasks that emacs can’t do).
If you’re just looking for a portable computer, the new MacBook Air may be another good option. (MacBook Pro too, if you have a sufficient budget for your computer)

나의 iPhone에서 보냄

2019. 2. 7. 오후 7:31, Van L <[hidden email]> 작성:

> Stefan Monnier <[hidden email]> writes:
>
>>> I am unfamiliar with the term "1L", and Google wasn't much help. What
>>> does it mean beyond "one liter"?
>
>> I think he meant just that: one liter, i.e. an approximate upper limit
>> on the size of the machine.
>
> I picked it up from the Lenovo brochureware techspecs. Perhaps this
> capacity measure has origin in watercooling. The specs mention
> certification for independent software vendors and that I expect means
> chances are better for Debian and the like to "just work".
>
>> Shouldn't *all* "1L machines" run Emacs
>> just fine?
>
> It takes quite a while for gnus to process L117196 on entry to
> gmane.emacs.help.  And, multitasking is impossible while this is
> busy. A 6core cpu with HT won't make a difference to the 4core without
> HT in performance, here.
>
>> Anyway the RPi, even including the case, should
>> be way below the 1L constraint
>
> The worry is RPi's hobbykit won't cool adequately. The bits and pieces
> wearout quick, for example, the SD card, &c, &c.
>
> --
> © 2019 Van L
>  gpg using EEF2 37E9 3840 0D5D 9183  251E 9830 384E 9683 B835
>  "Where is the letter T?" -Joni Mitchell
>
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 1L?

Emanuel Berg-5
In reply to this post by Van L
Van L wrote:

>> Shouldn't *all* "1L machines" run Emacs
>> just fine?
>
> It takes quite a while for gnus to process
> L117196 on entry to gmane.emacs.help. And,
> multitasking is impossible while this is
> busy. A 6core cpu with HT won't make
> a difference to the 4core without HT in
> performance, here.

What is "L117196"? For me, it doesn't take many
seconds to enter a newsgroup after the initial
reading is done. You can even cancel all the
messages after being absent for some time.
That will be even faster.

>> Anyway the RPi, even including the case,
>> should be way below the 1L constraint
>
> The worry is RPi's hobbykit won't cool
> adequately. The bits and pieces wearout
> quick, for example, the SD card, &c, &c.

Well, like I said, mine is from 2015.
Maybe I got it in 2016. Still runs. But the SD
card, and in particular swap space, can be
a problem, which is why I don't really
recommend the RPi as a development platform.
This doesn't mean you can't do programming on
it, and I've done tons. But a full-size
computer with plain Debian is probably better.
Which also makes sense.

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 1L?

Emanuel Berg-5
In reply to this post by 조성빈
조성빈 wrote:

> Looking the thread it looks like you’ve used
> macOS for these years and finding a new mac
> :-) While many people in this list are
> free-software advocates and doesn’t like
> ‘proprietary apple software ‘ and insists on
> free software, Apple’s macOS is much, much
> helpful on tasks that you can’t solve with
> emacs (like web surfing).

You can surf the web with Emacs, e.g. using 3rd
party software Emacs-w3m which is in the Debian
[fork] repos.

And even if you don't want to do that and
instead use a web browser like Firefox what
does this has to do with macOS specifically?
There are web browsers for Linux as well :)

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 1L?

조성빈
Well, as far as I know, w3m can’t execute Javascript, right? It’s not a viable alternative to ‘real’ web browsers.

The reason why I said about ‘free software’ is because the OP said that
* He will miss the Apple ecosystem,
* He said that other manufacturers (ChromeOS, System76, etc) didn’t look serious as much as the Apple TV,
* And he also specifically asked if the i3 or the i5 would be better when using the new Mac Mini,
but the first response (of this maillist) was, “Hey, use Linux! It’s free, and Apple is bad... Why use Apple when they don’t let them roll our own devices?”

I’m not saying that free software has problems, (I use them, like GNU Emacs) but pointing Linux is irrelevant to the question.

나의 iPhone에서 보냄

2019. 2. 8. 오전 12:47, Emanuel Berg <[hidden email]> 작성:

> 조성빈 wrote:
>
>> Looking the thread it looks like you’ve used
>> macOS for these years and finding a new mac
>> :-) While many people in this list are
>> free-software advocates and doesn’t like
>> ‘proprietary apple software ‘ and insists on
>> free software, Apple’s macOS is much, much
>> helpful on tasks that you can’t solve with
>> emacs (like web surfing).
>
> You can surf the web with Emacs, e.g. using 3rd
> party software Emacs-w3m which is in the Debian
> [fork] repos.
>
> And even if you don't want to do that and
> instead use a web browser like Firefox what
> does this has to do with macOS specifically?
> There are web browsers for Linux as well :)
>
> --
> underground experts united
> http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
>
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 1L?

Emanuel Berg-5
조성빈 wrote:

> Well, as far as I know, w3m can’t execute
> Javascript, right? It’s not a viable
> alternative to ‘real’ web browsers.

It depends what web pages you are visiting, but
obviously you are right if you want JavaScript.

But you can still use Emacs-w3m for everything
else, to have all the advantages since it is
integrated with Emacs and have the familiar
Emacs/Elisp customization/extension
interface.

And then have Firefox or whatever on the side
for maps, gear, and other stuff that rely
on JavaScript.

Even so, what you call real web browsers (with
JavaScript) are available on Linux systems, and
many other systems as well for that matter,
just as they are on the Apple OSs. Which I'm
sure you are aware of BTW.

> “Hey, use Linux! It’s free, and Apple is
> bad... Why use Apple when they don’t let them
> roll our own devices?”

Why indeed? :)

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 1L?

조성빈

2019. 2. 8. 오전 4:51, Emanuel Berg <[hidden email]> 작성:

>> “Hey, use Linux! It’s free, and Apple is
>> bad... Why use Apple when they don’t let them
>> roll our own devices?”
>
> Why indeed? :)
I mean, what’s better between macOS and Linux is irrelevant, because the OP is (clearly ) a 10 year macOS user, willing to buy a new computer because it became obsolete (by Apple), and asked about the variant of Mac Mini to buy.
Linux is a good operating system, but it’s irrelevant to the point.
Think of this: You asked hardware to run Linux, and a bunch of ‘Apple Fans’ demand to buy Mac because Linux takes forever to configure, Linux doesn’t even dump memory to SSD when going to sleep, desktop GUI is fragmented, etc... It would be annoying, right?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 1L?

Vladimir Sedach
In reply to this post by Emanuel Berg-5
> You can surf the web with Emacs, e.g. using 3rd
> party software Emacs-w3m which is in the Debian
> [fork] repos.

I recommend using emacs-w3m from the source repository, it contains
many bugfixes:

https://github.com/emacs-w3m/emacs-w3m

If anyone is under the delusion that w3m is not a "real" web browser,
I would recommend they try emacs-w3m for a while. It is simply a
better experience for serious browsing.

GNU IceCat is a web browser that supports JavaScript.

Finally, if you do not want to use GNU/Linux, OpenBSD is another
great Free Software operating system that can run on many models of
Mac Mini, and works great for hosting Emacs (typing this in GNU Emacs
on OpenBSD right now, with a bunch of emacs-w3m tabs open in the
other window…).

Vladimir

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 1L?

Van L
In reply to this post by 조성빈

> Looking the thread it looks like you’ve used macOS for these years and
> finding a new mac :-)

Far from it. I'm genuinely looking for alternatives.

I believe the macOS quality probably isn't what I'm used to judging by
r/macOS on Reddit, but the internet plants and trolls could be at it.

> While many people in this list are free-software advocates and doesn’t
> like ‘proprietary apple software ‘ and insists on free software,

Here be wizards, dragons, saints (and little critters in dungeons who've
signed NDAs).

> Apple’s macOS is much, much helpful on tasks that you can’t solve with
> emacs (like web surfing).

This isn't true for me in text in html, for example

  And if he is compelled to look straight at the light, will he not have

the above line is fine in eww-mode for web reading.

> The new Mac Mini is very powerful and the i3 processor will be
> sufficient to run emacs, but I would recommend the i5 processor (for
> daily tasks that emacs can’t do).

YT and JS outside of GNU/Emacs.

> If you’re just looking for a portable computer, the new MacBook Air
> may be another good option. (MacBook Pro too, if you have a sufficient
> budget for your computer)

The new Mac Book Air has a dimmer display beside the older products a
step above or below in category feature/price. Some people say.

I'm 100% at desk with two screens and laptop isn't as handy as iPad,
iPhone on away walks without desk. (I fear the laptop keyboards are too
damn cheap on touch)

--
© 2019 Van L
gpg using EEF2 37E9 3840 0D5D 9183  251E 9830 384E 9683 B835
"If this is higher education I am glad I missed it." -Joni Mitchell


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 1L?

Van L
In reply to this post by Emanuel Berg-5
Emanuel Berg writes:

> What is "L117196"? For me, it doesn't take many
> seconds to enter a newsgroup after the initial

That number is the line count for 16y46w1d of gmane.emacs.help

> ... a full-size computer with plain Debian is probably better.
> Which also makes sense.

Debian can be a pain in the arse for getting Emacs's documentation
because of purist's polemical interpretation of freedom is my
understanding. The kernel lead programmer doesn't use Debian according
to YT headlines.

On NetBSD the Emacs package is difficult, cross referencing to the C
source code is too hard.

--
© 2019 Van L
gpg using EEF2 37E9 3840 0D5D 9183  251E 9830 384E 9683 B835
"If this is higher education I am glad I missed it." -Joni Mitchell


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 1L?

Tomas Zerolo
On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 08:14:44PM +1100, Van L wrote:
> Debian can be a pain in the arse for getting Emacs's documentation
> because of purist's polemical interpretation of freedom is my
> understanding.

Understanding things is usually better than resorting to -- uh --
polemics oneself. It is true that the GNU  Free Documentation
License (in its unrestricted form) is incompatible with the
Debian Free Software Guidelines. This is unfortunate, but such
messups are bound to happen from time to time. Each side has its
valid points.

That said, the Emacs docs /are/ available for Debianites, under
the non-free section. Where's the problem?

> The kernel lead programmer doesn't use Debian according
> to YT headlines.

Whatever YT is, I don't read its headlines ;-)

> On NetBSD the Emacs package is difficult, cross referencing to the C
> source code is too hard.

What do you mean by that?

Cheers
-- tomás

signature.asc (205 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 1L?

Emanuel Berg-5
In reply to this post by 조성빈
조성빈 wrote:

> I mean, what’s better between macOS and Linux
> is irrelevant, because the OP is (clearly )
> a 10 year macOS user, willing to buy a new
> computer because it became obsolete (by
> Apple), and asked about the variant of Mac
> Mini to buy. Linux is a good operating
> system, but it’s irrelevant to the point.
> Think of this: You asked hardware to run
> Linux, and a bunch of ‘Apple Fans’ demand to
> buy Mac because Linux takes forever to
> configure, Linux doesn’t even dump memory to
> SSD when going to sleep, desktop GUI is
> fragmented, etc... It would be
> annoying, right?

Very.

But think of this, many people have smoked
tobacco for more than 10 years and then
stopped, and now their bodies (lungs) have to
a great extent recovered from this habit,
God willing.

:)

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 1L?

Emanuel Berg-5
In reply to this post by Van L
Van L wrote:

> Here be wizards, dragons, saints (and little
> critters in dungeons who've signed NDAs).

NDA = Non-disclosure agreement

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573


123