Move from DSL-N rc4 to DSL-N 1.0

Forum: DSL-N
Topic: Move from DSL-N rc4 to DSL-N 1.0
started by: Juanito

Posted by Juanito on Mar. 06 2007,07:49

I know that DSL is somewhat "developer constrained" and really appreciate the hard work and commitment that goes into it.

I can't help thinking that all DSL-N needs for it to take a leap forwards in terms of popularity is for dpkg/apt-get functionality to be added (as opposed to the current work-around) and for some tidying up to allow applications to be compiled under DSL-N from tar.gz downloads.

If the above were done, people would be able to build their own extensions easily and take advantage of the additional 2.6.x functionality.

I have a need for both flavours - DSL (frugal hd install on an ancient desktop) and DSL-N (usb boot on a relatively modern laptop).

Would it be possible to take a break from the hectic pace of development of DSL at 3.3 and move DSL-N from rc4 to 1.0?

Posted by dougz on Mar. 12 2007,22:56

Quote

I have a need for both flavours - DSL (frugal hd install on an ancient desktop) and DSL-N (usb boot on a relatively modern laptop).

Me, too! I have great respect for the tremendous technology that goes into DSL, but it may become a victim of its own success.

Moore's Law mandates that the natural install base for a 50 MB distro is gradually shrinking, while the base for a smallish distro like DSL-n, Puppy, Arch, eLive, Zenwalk, Mint, and Vector is growing. If you read the reader comments at < Distro Watch Weekly >, "small system" people are looking for friendliness and configurability.

Quote

I can't help thinking that all DSL-N needs for it to take a leap forwards in terms of popularity is for dpkg/apt-get functionality

DSL is technically brilliant, but the other small distros are far easier for *nix newbies. Most users don't want to have to deal with configuring backup/restore and persistent directories, let alone .uci & .unc. Great technology of speed & space efficiency, but not newbie-friendly.

Further, the DSL app repository seriously lags the other distros. While this may (occasionally) be for size reasons, it makes DSL somewhat less competitive when open source apps go through relatively rapid function & security updates. E.g., DSL 3.2 has Firefox 1.06 while current is 2.02. How to install that on a (recommended) Frugal system, should the user have the resources & desire to do so?

DSL has been very successful in the ultra small system area and the system rescue area. Now that Gparted, SystemRescue, and BackTrack are moving into the rescue area, one has to wonder if there will continue to be enough interest in the ultra small distro or whether there needs to be something a bit bigger & friendlier for newbies.

Let me emphasize that this is said with the utmost respect for the authors and the knowledge that I'm in the minority in the DSL user base. I'm concerned that the user base won't grow if the emphasis continues to be primarily on the 50 MB user. Moores law may start passing DSL by.

Posted by lucky13 on Mar. 12 2007,23:41

Quote (dougz @ Mar. 12 2007,17:56)

I have great respect for the tremendous technology that goes into DSL, but it may become a victim of its own success.

I disagree. DSL fits a particular niche that other small distros don't. And never will.

Quote

Moore's Law

...has nothing to do with minimal Linux distributions. It has to do with the pace of bleeding edge technology, specifically the rate at which transistors can be -- and are -- added to circuits over specific periods of time.

Quote

DSL is technically brilliant, but the other small distros are far easier for *nix newbies. �Most users don't want to have to deal with configuring backup/restore and persistent directories, let alone .uci & .unc. �Great technology of speed & space efficiency, but not newbie-friendly.

I disagree. Everything has a learning curve. DSL has plenty of documentation available for anyone to understand how to get the most out of it. DSL is also a lot more versatile than Puppy (since you mentioned it) in that DSL can make use of Debian's apt-get, and it also gives the user the option of loading to RAM (Puppy does it by default, doesn't it?). And "newbie-friendly" is pretty subjective. If that includes auto-detection of hardware, DSL is on par or even ahead of Puppy and Vector (I have hardware DSL has detected right off the bat that the latter two took some manual configuring).

Quote

Further, the DSL app repository seriously lags the other distros. �While this may (occasionally) be for size reasons, it makes DSL somewhat less competitive when open source apps go through relatively rapid function & security updates. �E.g., DSL 3.2 has Firefox 1.06 while current is 2.02. �How to install that on a (recommended) Frugal system, should the user have the resources & desire to do so?

They do. Let them develop it themselves if they seek to be on the bleeding edge. This is an area where I wonder what people are smoking. DSL can be extended to include any update any user wants. No? Take a look at which versions of SeaMonkey (almost the most recent) and Opera (latest) are available. Concerned about security? Take a look at the following link and note two things. First, the greatest number of vulnerabilities are with x.0 -- major -- upgrade versions. I don't want 2.0 -- which was the latest available at the time of the last DSL release -- and its bugs on a STABLE (old stable, heh) system. Second, note that the severity of the vulnerabilities increases proportionally by release -- 1.5+ has many more vulnerabilities to patch than 1.0.6, etc.
< http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/known-vulnerabilities.html >

Quote

DSL has been very successful in the ultra small system area and the system rescue area. �Now that Gparted, SystemRescue, and BackTrack are moving into the rescue area, one has to wonder if there will continue to be enough interest in the ultra small distro or whether there needs to be something a bit bigger & friendlier for newbies.

"Bigger" is a problem for those who want an embedded system to run in Windows or Linux, or who want to boot and run Linux completely with a USB thumbdrive.

Quote

Let me emphasize that this is said with the utmost respect for the authors and the knowledge that I'm in the minority in the DSL user base. �I'm concerned that the user base won't grow if the emphasis continues to be primarily on the 50 MB user. �Moores law may start passing DSL by.

Moore's Law has nothing to do with this issue.

The number of computers that will reach obsolence or a dead end with respect to XP over the next few years will make them as much candidates for "bloated" distros like Ubuntu, Mandriva, etc., as for smaller ones. Anything capable of running XP comfortably will just as comfortably run Ubuntu.

What you expect is DSL to try to keep up with the Fluxbuntus, UbuntuLites, Vectors, and Puppies. I think DSL has its own niche that the others can't compete in, and that DSL should stick to its guns by cramming as much function into as little space as possible. The user base for DSL isn't necessarily the same drawn to the antialiased eyecandy of something like Fluxbuntu, which is quite similar to DSL-N in its approach to things. DSL is a choice among many -- changing it into just-another-distro with more bloat than function would be a bad thing.

Posted by roberts on Mar. 13 2007,00:09

I believe you will see movement after I complete and release DSL v3.3.

Posted by dougz on Mar. 13 2007,00:52

To lucky13: I don't think it would be profitable to do a point-by-point rebuttal, particularly where your comments deal with preferences or slight misunderstandings of my points.

Remember: I'm talking about DSL-N, not DSL.

I was trying to point out that the "sweet spot" for any piece of software is influenced by the available hardware. Yes, DSL will fit on smaller boxes than anything else. However, most user's "sweet spot" will inevitably move from smaller to larger hardware as people are willing to seek more ease of use because they have access to larger hardware. RAM == ease of use. As those discarded 256+ MB Win2K and WinXP boxes become available, people expect more. A distro optimized for 50 MB will increasingly be a "niche" distro. A bigger sibling can accomodate additional users who would not be attracted to a tiny distro.

I highly recommend the DWW comments cited in my previous post. Most commenters expect Linux to "just work," like they do an Apple. I'd also highly recommend reading < esr's "World Domination" paper. > Linux is still a niche OS. DSL, while a superb piece of technology, is a niche Linux. Bigger user base == more donations == more development.

I understand embedded systems. I've programmed them -- 8051 (4K ROM, 128 bytes RAM) cross-assembler and Forth-based tiny systems. Very rare now. The "sweet spot" moved on to the point that people program embedded systems in C and other HLLs now. I programmed to the "bare metal" (no OS, just my "real time" code) while today's developers expect to have an OS and toolkit to work with on modern embedded systems. Different "sweet spot."

Thumbrives are 4GB now! Different "sweet spot!"

Quote

I think DSL has its own niche that the others can't compete in

We agree! My point is that I think that niche will shrink as people's definition of a "small system" changes. My first box was a TRS 80 Model 1, Z80@ 1.77 MHz 4K ROM, 4K RAM, cassette storage. I expect more now. Different "sweet spot."

I still think Juantio's point is correct:

Quote

I can't help thinking that all DSL-N needs for it to take a leap forwards in terms of popularity is for dpkg/apt-get functionality to be added

That allows a user of small-to-moderate skill to extend his/her DSL-N in any way they see fit.

DSL's user base is both an enormous strength (skilled, motivated, self learners) and a weakness (skilled, focused on very small systems - by today's standards). However, I really don't think it is incorrect to say that DSL has achieved its extraordinary efficiency at the price of "ease of use." That is not a tradeoff that most users will make. As Juanito said, DSL-N would be more appealing if it was easier.

Posted by lucky13 on Mar. 13 2007,02:50

Quote (dougz @ Mar. 12 2007,19:52)

I read "DSL" as "DSL" since you'd previously distinguished between it and DSL-N:

Quote

I have great respect for the tremendous technology that goes into DSL, but it may become a victim of its own success....Moore's Law mandates that the natural install base for a 50 MB distro is gradually shrinking, while the base for a smallish distro like DSL-n, Puppy, Arch, eLive, Zenwalk, Mint, and Vector is growing....DSL is technically brilliant, but the other small distros are far easier for *nix newbies.... the DSL app repository seriously lags the other distros... it makes DSL somewhat less competitive... etc.

I don't think DSL-N should try to take on other smaller distros but should continue with the same underlying ethic as DSL. It should function similarly, imo, to DSL: it should cover more recent hardware, use the same installation options, have a solid base of stable and usable applications on the live CD, and it should be easily extended with applications that can be loaded as needed (UNC, UCI).

Quote

A distro optimized for 50 MB will increasingly be a "niche" distro.

It already is one. Has been. It's never been aimed at the folks on the bleeding edge, at least with respect to application releases. Yet it continues to be one of the most downloaded -- AND USED -- distros. I think that speaks volumes to demand for what it does and how people use it.

Finally, I don't think DSL and DSL-N are out of anyone's grasp to understand. It's pretty easy for those who bother to read the documentation. The same goes for any other distro -- trigger-happy newbies will make mistakes regardless of how "automagic" processes and configurations are made. Yes, adding apt-get will likely expand the base who want a traditional hard drive install; it probably won't fix the problem you raised regarding bleeding edge, or even Debian unstable or testing, applications and the clamor for them. I don't think they'll be any happier with DSL-N than they are with DSL if that's what's really important to them, especially if DSL-N remains reasonably close to DSL in its "stable" approach. If Fluxbuntu, Puppy, Vector, et al, are all already doing that, why try to keep up with the Joneses?

Posted by Juanito on Mar. 13 2007,03:17

Quote (roberts @ Mar. 12 2007,23:09)

I believe you will see movement after I complete and release DSL v3.3.

Excellent - I already started tidying up my previous extensions in anticipation �

Posted by andrewphoto on Mar. 13 2007,11:52

I am primarily using DSL-N for some time now.

All I really needed Windows for is Photoshop, but I do brightness contrast levels crop in Gimpshop now.
I can boot Windows on a compactflash if I need to use a particularly specialist photographic software.

My HDD was worn & torturously noisy, poor-man install compactflash now, fast, no going back.

Backup is easy, you just click DSLpanel Backup/restore etc. Search the forum & read docs, I put my cell-phone modem #!/bin/sh in /usr/local/bin .filetool.lst, and of course the FANTASTIC DSL forum is EXTREMELY helpful.

I hope for DSL-N with apt-get, so I can install gtypist & this & that.
I choose not to apply my brain to the work-around.

The only problem I have with DSL-N is when I press the F11 key twice, but lose the min max close in the top right hand corner.

People are using DSL-N to do their daily routine things, you know, check emails, write notes, access the net.

In England french fries are called chips, and there is a saying 'cheap as chips.' In England silicon chips are called silicon chips.

I got a good as new slow 30X speed compactflash card off Ebay for peanuts, or rather, chips, speed of DSL-N poor-man is quite impressive, give it a try brothers & sisters.

Posted by dougz on Mar. 13 2007,13:35

lucky13, you are eloquent in your arguments. It is refreshing to be able to discuss technical & preference issues without getting personal.

Quote

I think that we will probably have to agree to disagree on the usability vs. efficiency tradeoff. DSL has been justifiably successful as a highly efficient distro, while requiring a bit more effort on the part of the user, as compared to Puppy, etc. Fair enough. Lots of happy users. No argument from me.

So, it comes down to a question of mission. What is the mission of DSL-N? Should it be a larger DSL, with a 2.6 kernel and a few, larger packages? Alternatively, should it be a bit more user/newbie friendly, at the cost of increased size?

You seem to be firmly in first camp and I am in the second.

FWIW, I think that we geeks really enjoy stuffing DSL into tiny boxes and maximizing the efficiency of aging hardware. However, if you read the DWW comments (particularly Mint vs. Ubuntu), you see strong emphasis on ease-of-use. Same with esr's paper.

I think you see the same thing in the relative success of the other small distros. Fluxbuntu doesn't appear to have critical mass yet. For the others, ease of use & expandability apears to be highly correlated to their success.

If I had a vote in the mission of DSL-N, I'd prefer a very small base/core Fluxbox/2.6 kernel distro with easy expandability via the Ubuntu repositories. (Ubuntu, because they appear to be the best maintained & documented.)

I'd also like to see DSL-N expansion scripts. ala Automatix, but more focused so that those who want to add features (bloat ;-) to their DSL-Ns could easily do so. Those who want small & efficient get it. Those who want features/bloat/eye candy could selectively add it without having to become geeks. (Automatix is a scattergun, but focused scripts could add multiple packages selectively. Debian package management because of dependencies.)

Guess I'm just a lazier geek than you... ;-)

Posted by lucky13 on Mar. 13 2007,15:25

Quote (dougz @ Mar. 13 2007,08:35)

lucky13, you are eloquent in your arguments. �It is refreshing to be able to discuss technical & preference issues without getting personal.

Thanks. I didn't start posting here to fight, make enemies, or stake out turf. I just want to help others. I also have a few opinions. In stating opinions where I disagree with others, I try very hard not to be disagreeable. One of the great things about Linux is there's enough diversity where we can all find happy ground.

Quote

I think that we will probably have to agree to disagree on the usability vs. efficiency tradeoff. �DSL has been justifiably successful as a highly efficient distro, while requiring a bit more effort on the part of the user, as compared to Puppy, etc. �Fair enough. �Lots of happy users. �No argument from me.

YMMV. Like I wrote previously, I've had less trouble getting DSL up and running on more hardware than I've had with Puppy and Vector. The latter two have been a pain in the @$$ on this particular computer; DSL, Mepis, and OpenBSD have all been a breeze on it.

Quote

So, it comes down to a question of mission. �What is the mission of DSL-N? �Should it be a larger DSL, with a 2.6 kernel and a few, larger packages? �Alternatively, should it be a bit more user/newbie friendly, at the cost of increased size?

You seem to be firmly in first camp and I am in the second.

I'm only in one camp because I think it's a niche that deserves to be filled, and not at the expense of trying to keep up with the other distros you've named. I don't oppose the other camp, I just don't think DSL needs to break ranks and go in the same direction everyone else is. Look at the rankings of downloads and page views on various sites, including distrowatch. DSL is ahead of Slackware, Knoppix, Gentoo, Zenwalk, Mint, and Puppy in page hits over the last six months on distrowatch. And way ahead of the last two -- nearly twice the hits per day.

Quote

FWIW, I think that we geeks really enjoy stuffing DSL into tiny boxes and maximizing the efficiency of aging hardware. �However, if you read the DWW comments (particularly Mint vs. Ubuntu), you see strong emphasis on ease-of-use. �Same with esr's paper.

I disagree with your presumption that DSL isn't easy to use. One of the things I like most about DSL is I can run it on any x86-compatible computer via live CD, USB, or installed to hard drive. Sure, I can do the same with Puppy but it loads to RAM by default. That's a big problem on computers with limited RAM. And while I'm the first to admit I haven't played with it very much (because of some hardware issues, not to mention some disdain for some of its peculiarities), Puppy's just not as versatile as DSL.

Quote

If I had a vote in the mission of DSL-N, I'd prefer a very small base/core Fluxbox/2.6 kernel distro with easy expandability via the Ubuntu repositories. �(Ubuntu, because they appear to be the best maintained & documented.)

So you'd target the traditional hard drive install over frugal and get away from one of the areas that makes DSL stand out. Do you mean "bleeding edge" by "best maintained"?

If you really do mean "best maintained," why not use pkgsrc instead of Ubuntu repositories? That would accomplish a few things that not too many other distros are doing. First, you'd have a minimal live CD that can be used or installed in a variety of ways like DSL. Second, it would make a great base Debian hard drive system that's easily or even auto-configured for most common hardware. Third, it would be extended via a system that's a lot more predictable (in terms of directory tree) than Debian; that automatically handles dependencies (and better than Debian, imo, based on my experience with it using OpenBSD); and that allows users to use binaries (Debian binary kit) or source.

I don't know of another Debian-based distro using pkgsrc, only a couple Slack-based ones (e.g., Voltalinux). I really don't know how practical it would be with a stripped-down system -- in the DSL tradition -- since BSDs are unit-based systems (the core system of kernel and utilities is built together rather than ad hoc/piecemeal like Linux).

Quote

I'd also like to see DSL-N expansion scripts. ala Automatix, but more focused so that those who want to add features (bloat ;-) to their DSL-Ns could easily do so. �Those who want small & efficient get it. �Those who want features/bloat/eye candy could selectively add it without having to become geeks. �(Automatix is a scattergun, but focused scripts could add multiple packages selectively. �Debian package management because of dependencies.)

Guess I'm just a lazier geek than you... �;-)

I'm not opposed to bloat -- using MepisLite/KDE now. I won't fight with you over sloth -- using MepisLite/KDE now because I'm too lazy to reboot to DSL. And I only needed to use KOffice for about two hours a couple weeks ago...

$ uptime
10:23:01 up 17 days, 11:20

Posted by dougz on Mar. 14 2007,00:44

Re: Difficulty -- My current peeve is that Ubuntu 3dfx drivers broke badly during Edgy and they don't seem to be interested in fixing it, even in Feisty. One of my two geriatric boxes (750 MHz PIII, 950 MHz Duron) is 3dfx. Bug is documented, patch available & works. No fix in distro. All distros have issues, even DSL... ;-)

Re: DSL/DSL-N filling niche for tiny distro -- I agree. We disagree about means to enhance the base. Frugal is great, in its place. Traditional Debian has advantages of its own, including learning curve and easier to add current packages with Synaptic.

Small base distro, two supported install models, two different repository systems. Choices are good, IMHO.

Please note: 36% of DSL users use "Traditional Hard Disk Drive install," per < DSL User Survey Results. > Only 29% use "Frugal on Hard Disk Drive."

Re: Ease -- DSL/DSL-N are different from standard Linux. There are advantages, but there is also a learning curve. One thing that is true -- many DSL packages are downlevel.

I really think that it is easy for geeks like us to forget how much more we know than the average user. Again, the DWW reader comments indicate that even those Linux enthusiasts are much, much lazier than thee and me. Highly recommended reading.

When many of these people are chosing Mint over Ubuntu because Flash, codecs, multimedia, etc are pre-configured, you have an existence proof of Eric Raymond's "World Domination" points! For these people, Automatix is too much work -- pkgsrc is not an option!

I don't want to take away the things that make DSL/DSL-N what they are. However, I think that there would be many more users if it was radically easier to add desired current packages, even if these packages don't particularly appeal to the majority of current DSL-N users. (If they want to "waste" their memory on "bloat" -- more power to them! Personally, I'm happy two "waste" the memory for K3B.)

I'd submit that Debian Stable is a bit too stable for most folks. YMMV. The genius of Ubuntu is popularizing Debian. They aren't perfect, but they seem to have done a pretty good job balancing the risks/benefits of being a bit less stable. Many FOSS projects have very rapid development cycles. Downlevel code is not necessarily more stable. E.g., mplayer, WINE.

Mepis is bloated and going to an Ubuntu base makes it worse. No one is ever going to say that Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu aren't hugely bloated. Slackware based distros have package issues and some even still use LILO! Fluxbuntu still looks very problematic.

A very tiny Fluxbox/2.6.20 system with easy expandability still looks like an opportunity. Currently, there isn't a great "small" distro that is bigger than DSL. I guarantee that the majority of Mint/Ubuntu users aren't going be to doing Frugal installs and learning the "way of DSL." Would some of them be willing to use a tiny DSL-N in traditional Debian mode with Synaptic against the Ubuntu repositories in order to utilize that "obsolete hardware?"

Posted by lucky13 on Mar. 14 2007,00:45

FWIW: Following up on what I wrote to dougz about Debian-based distros using pkgsrc... I forgot about bluewall. Lite version ISOs are under 100 MB (latest=93 MB).
< http://bluewall.es.gnu.org/ >

That would be a very minimal "let's just get the base up and running and then build the packages" install like BSD, not a live CD with various installation options like DSL-N. So it's not exactly reinventing what's already being done.

I'll try to play around with DSL-N/Knoppix this weekend between March Madness and see what I can do. Anyone have any interest in this?

Posted by lucky13 on Mar. 14 2007,01:13

Quote (dougz @ Mar. 13 2007,19:44)

I don't want to take away the things that make DSL/DSL-N what they are. �However, I think that there would be many more users if it was radically easier to add desired current packages, even if these packages don't particularly appeal to the majority of current DSL-N users. �(If they want to "waste" their memory on "bloat" -- more power to them! �Personally, I'm happy two "waste" the memory for K3B.)

As long as that can be accomplished without bloating the initial ISO. That's the catch-22. All of a sudden, DSL-N is Fluxbuntu with an extra installation option.

Quote

I'd submit that Debian Stable is a bit too stable for most folks. �YMMV.

I agree that most people are lured into the "need" for the latest, greatest, most current release. Nevermind they're only doing the Linux equivalent of trying to make Win98 boxes run Vista. I also agree Debian's packages are slower to make it to stable than what other binary-based distros do. I'd rather err on the side of caution than take my chances with an unstable (general sense of the word) system.

Quote

Mepis is bloated and going to an Ubuntu base makes it worse.

That's why I'm sticking with MepisLite 3.3.2 and Sarge repositories.

Quote

Slackware based distros have package issues and some even still use LILO!

Because Slack still uses LILO by default. Blame Pat!

Quote

Fluxbuntu still looks very problematic.

It's a work in progress, much like DSL-N. Marathons don't start at 26.199 miles, they start with that first step at 0.00.

Quote

A very tiny Fluxbox/2.6.20 system with easy expandability still looks like an opportunity. �Currently, there isn't a great "small" distro that is bigger than DSL. �I guarantee that the majority of Mint/Ubuntu users aren't going be to doing Frugal installs and learning the "way of DSL." �Would some of them be willing to use a tiny DSL-N in traditional Debian mode with Synaptic against the Ubuntu repositories in order to utilize that "obsolete hardware?"

First, "obsolete" is relative and so is the need for a 2.6 kernel -- especially as it relates to what is and isn't obsolete.

Second, wanna know what you're asking for? It's Fluxbuntu. It has the base required for using unstable and testing repositories, it's stripped down considerably from Ubuntu's desire to load every available byte onto a 700 MB CD, it installs like Debian/Ubuntu, can be used as a live CD, and so on. That's the direction you're asking Robert and John to take DSL-N. And I think it's already being done and it's already about the same level of maturity.

Posted by dougz on Mar. 14 2007,22:13

I think lucky13 and I have pretty well done this topic to death. No sense spending much more time on it.

Quote

... wanna know what you're asking for? It's Fluxbuntu. It has the base required for using unstable and testing repositories, it's stripped down considerably from Ubuntu's desire to load every available byte onto a 700 MB CD, it installs like Debian/Ubuntu, can be used as a live CD, and so on. That's the direction you're asking Robert and John to take DSL-N. And I think it's already being done and it's already about the same level of maturity.

I've run both DSL-N and Fluxbuntu. Yes, Fluxbuntu is stripped down, compared to Ubuntu, but it still contains some idiosyncratic bloat of its own. Very much driven by the vision of a very few people. I'd disagree that Fluxbuntu is anywhere near the maturity of DSL-N. It's also far bigger & slower. Current iso is 309 MB. < Fluxbuntu DL page. >

Fluxbuntu forums have very little activity. Last code 27-Sep-2006. No Feisty alpha/beta yet. No roadmap. No timeline.

I'm beginning to wonder if it isn't going to just grind to a halt, like Ubuntu Lite. Why in the world was Fluxbuntu to be a full, multi- platform distro instead of a fluxbuntu-desktop Ubuntu package (added to the lightweight, no-GUI Ubuntu Server install) that included scripts to shutdown daemons and uninstall bloat?

PPC, AMD-64, IA-64 support? Alternate installs, too? Currently seeking artists, but no new code since 27-Sep? Overreaching, with precious little progress to-date...

Fluxbuntu is only superficially like DSL-N. DSL-N is built on Knoppix, as well as Debian, technology. DSL-N allows Frugal, while Fluxbuntu doesn't. Also UNC, UCI, etc. DSL-N was looking like the very best bet for a truly mini 2.6. distro.

Quote

I agree that most people are lured into the "need" for the latest, greatest, most current release.

Gotta disagree with you. If the users want something, whether you or I personally agree, their desires should be taken into consideration. If a user wants a highly efficient DSL-N but then wants to install the latest & greatest mplayer, fine. They may need a feature you or I don't. It's all about choice! More DSL-N users makes for a more vibrant DSL-N user community. The user community is one of DSL's strengths and the huge Ubuntu user & developer community is also a huge advantage to all users of Debian-derived distros.

Posted by lucky13 on Mar. 15 2007,14:16

Quote (dougz @ Mar. 14 2007,17:13)

I've run both DSL-N and Fluxbuntu. �Yes, Fluxbuntu is stripped down, compared to Ubuntu, but it still contains some idiosyncratic bloat of its own. �Very much driven by the vision of a very few people. �I'd disagree that Fluxbuntu is anywhere near the maturity of DSL-N. �It's also far bigger & slower. �Current iso is 309 MB. �< Fluxbuntu DL page. >

Far bigger? Compare apples to apples. It has the latest versions of various apps, which I recall you said DSL-N should provide. That accounts for a lot of it. To do what you've recommended, DSL-N will at least double. And if you mean that DSL-N should only provide more recent apps in the repository, you can start adding some of the extensions you want -- that's a community effort, not strictly the realm of the developers.

Quote

Fluxbuntu is only superficially like DSL-N. �DSL-N is built on Knoppix, as well as Debian, technology. �DSL-N allows Frugal, while Fluxbuntu doesn't. �Also UNC, UCI, etc. �DSL-N was looking like the very best bet for a truly mini 2.6. distro.

You want to use Ubuntu repositories in lieu of Debian. It would probably be easier to rebuild DSL-N from scratch on Ubuntu instead of Knoppix so that would be far more seamless.

If DSL-N remains Knoppix-based and more real Debian- than Ubuntu-oriented, let users decide how they want their systems to be -- just like now. You're not limited to using old stable or stable pools. Testing and unstable can mixed and matched, e.g.:
< http://jaqque.sbih.org/kplug/apt-pinning.html >

My computing needs are a little too critical to do that, but others who want to be on the bleeding edge can still run testing or unstable, or build the latest from code.

UNC/UCI extensions aren't suitable for the target audience -- traditional hard drive install -- to whom you want DSL-N to cater. UCIs can work on a hard drive install, but in a way that's totally counter your "lazy" and easier ethic.

Quote

I agree that most people are lured into the "need" for the latest, greatest, most current release.

Gotta disagree with you. �If the users want something, whether you or I personally agree, their desires should be taken into consideration. �If a user wants a highly efficient DSL-N but then wants to install the latest & greatest mplayer, fine. �They may need a feature you or I don't. �It's all about choice! �More DSL-N users makes for a more vibrant DSL-N user community. �The user community is one of DSL's strengths and the huge Ubuntu user & developer community is also a huge advantage to all users of Debian-derived distros.

Our disagreement isn't over whether users should be able to add whatever applications they want. We're both on the same page: anyone should be able to configure his or her system however he or she sees fit. Our disagreement is over the execution of that and whether it's the job of the user or the developers. I think the developers should be focused on providing a stable base rather than the minutiae bells and whistles users add anyway.

One can already configure or re-configure and extend (and even remaster) DSL/DSL-N or any other distro however one sees fit. That's a user issue, and it's only a developer issue to the extent that developers can make things easier or more difficult. I think the underlying philosophy of DSL/DSL-N makes it easy enough. There's also the community support here in the forums and wikis. It's a well-documented project.

Re the small group of Fluxbuntu developers: How many developers are running the show with DSL/DSL-N? I don't judge things on that basis. It only tells me a larger development group may be faster or slower than with one or two developers -- take a look at Gentoo's growth when it was headed by one person and look at what having too many developers has done to it since he left.

Finally, you mentioned Mint's addition of certain things to "ease" user experience. Some of those things are closed-source. Dittos for Ubuntu's use of proprietary drivers in the past (though they recently announced the next release will be totally open source). Do you think DSL-N should include any closed-source code -- drivers, Opera, etc. -- in the name of keeping things easy and functional, or should it stay true to the foundations of open source in general and Debian in particular?
< http://www.debian.org/social_contract >

Posted by dougz on Mar. 15 2007,21:57

With all respect, lucky13, I think you have deliberately misconstrued my arguments extensively in your last reply.

Rather than respond, I'll just leave my posts to stand for themselves.

Posted by lucky13 on Mar. 16 2007,07:06

Quote (dougz @ Mar. 15 2007,16:57)

With all respect, lucky13, I think you have deliberately misconstrued my arguments extensively in your last reply.

Rather than respond, I'll just leave my posts to stand for themselves.

Deliberately misconstrued extensively where and how, lol? I don't think I misconstrued anything, much less extensively. And damn sure not deliberately, lol!

On one hand you call something "idiosyncratic bloat" and with the other you insist DSL-N should have it to compete for a bigger slice of the small Linux pie as people migrate away from WinME and XP. Fluxbuntu already has the bleeding edge-release apps (or closer to them) you suggested DSL-N should have. This accounts for a good bit of Fluxbuntu's larger size. Nevermind the fact that it includes GCC, rox, and other things that are kind of beneficial for using (especially when it comes to converts from Windows) and even building a system (ever find a good use for GCC? I sure have). I guess "idiosyncratic bloat" -- your term -- is as subjective as "plain old bloat." Please illuminate me on the difference in your definitions sometime.

We can do this one hand-other hand thing again. On one hand you dismiss Fluxbuntu but on the other you say you want everything it has. The latter point is why I said it would probably be easier to rebuild DSL-N from scratch using Ubuntu if you want to use Ubuntu's repositories, automatix, etc., instead of using Knoppix and the Debian pools. Or DSL-N could just pick up the Fluxbuntu torch and carry it a while if the direction you think DSL-N should go is the direction the developers decide to take it. What were your criteria again? Based on fluxbox, fully Ubuntu-friendly, bleeding edge kernel, ready to use automatix, etc. That's Fluxbuntu!

I left one thing alone in that regard. The Knoppix versus Ubuntu base issue you raised is really only relevant to the extent that you want something that uses automatix and Ubuntu repositories instead of or along with apt-get/synaptic/aptitude -- not "superficialities" over which base either set of developers choose for their distros (maybe you misunderstood me and my point). Why totally rebuild an Ubuntu-friendly system atop Knoppix? I'm sure it can be done, but it would be a hell of a lot easier to start with an Ubuntu base and strip it down -- especially if you want to use Ubuntu's non-Debian-stable repositories. So we're right back to the previous paragraph: most of the work for what you say DSL-N should be is already done in Fluxbuntu. And all of that really does matter since DSL-N (edit: on a hard drive) would get a bit of a "facelift" every time some ambitious, enterprising newb ends up unintentionally upgrading 50% of DSL-N's (Knoppix 4.0.2's) libs just to install some peculiar little bleeding edge 200kb app he sees in the repository and decides he just has to have it on his computer and then gets upset with DSL because of all the broken dependencies that cause his system to go haywire (do newbs know that some of their old apps may not run if they upgrade dependencies without some degree of caution? who will tell them? automatix?).

It's unfortunate you've chosen to avoid the discussion after starting it. Like I wrote, it's all in the execution. I really don't think I missed anything you wrote. I've only stated my disagreement openly and, I think, pretty clearly and given you plenty of detail of where and why I disagree. I'm not deliberately twisting anything to state why I disagree with you. Don't make it personal like that.

Posted by andrewphoto on Mar. 16 2007,16:04

My Toshiba P-III-m 700Mhz came with Windows Me, but I preferred Windows 98 so I put that on it. I spent ages finding the sound driver that worked. Last week I accidentally deleted that sound driver from a USB stick. I downloaded the 'latest' Windows 98 driver from Toshiba & that didn't work. I tried a few other pucker drivers to no avail. And then I decided, blow it. All I really use Windows for is Adobe Photoshop, but recently I've been thankful for Gimpshop, oh & I started out learning Dreamweaver via 1.2.
I'm no developer & the extent of my programming ability is about if else, and I've been having fun with Linux for about 3 1/2 years now, reached a level of familiarity/competence, blow it, I've ditched Windows.

The reason I came to Linux in the first place is absolutely thus: speed.
I believe all that virus racket slows down your surfing so you spend more money on dial up. Life is short.

A good friend of mine's analogy of XP & changing your sound card is like you go to the mall & buy yourself a new TV & you get home & put your key in the front door lock & you can't get into your house.
My analogy of Vista (even though I've only glanced at it in the media for about 20 seconds,) is like you can't get in your house because Vista doesn't like your handwriting on a piece of paper in your pocket.

I wonder if we'll be still using the mouse in 2050, then again Confucius say the rat is a strong organism, first of the twelve animals in Chinese occult theory. At the end of time it'll be gonorrhoea (US gonorrhea,) & the cockroach!
I think touchscreen tft's are a little expensive, considering that they've been around for more than three decades, to the point where reliability is unassailable. Nevertheless I'm gonna git one next paycheck or three cos I got myself a mini-itx for a song the other day & a carputer will be useful for my employments.

No doubt I'll spin Knoppix first to try & get that lot working.
I aesthetically like Xfce & played with Slax a little, but threw the towel in cos cd-roms kept failing & I found the forum to be unfun & unhelpful (God I'm using Orwell Newspeak - unfun (although unfunny is in oldspeak.))

So that's it.
Like I said, I use that Knoppix tool.
Tremendous gratitude to DSL, it's unbloat & phenomenal forum are instrumental in my learning curve, got to a point in the curve now where I am able to ditch Windows, never been a conscious desire, just reacted to unworking sound driver from Toshiba which I PAY MONEY for.
And I run Sarge & now Etch, currently TRYING to play a regular audio cd in xfce. Cryptic insight required in Linux to auto-mount cd/dvd never ceases to amaze me! Having fun.

Ade, ya.hellenic

Posted by Jason W on Mar. 19 2007,04:42

I would like to see DSL-N move forward, of course, and I would also like it to remain true to the DSL heritage of resource friendliness as well as relatively small size rather than be a full blown Linux live cd. You can't have both at the same time and there are already enough full size live cd's out there in my opinion.

Posted by lucky13 on Mar. 19 2007,15:06

Quote (Jason W @ Mar. 18 2007,23:42)

I would like to see DSL-N move forward, of course, and I would also like it to remain true to the DSL heritage of resource friendliness as well as relatively small size rather than be a full blown Linux live cd. � You can't have both at the same time and there are already enough full size live cd's out there in my opinion.

I agree with you, Jason. It doesn't make much sense to me to have DSL-N take off in a completely different direction, such as using Ubuntu as a base (which makes a lot more sense than updating Knoppix 4.0.2 to use Ubuntu's repositories more seamlessly as the other user wanted) or even pkgsrc as I suggested. I figure it would be easier to make a spartan install that leaves just enough for a user to have a clean base on which to build whatever, and do it on the bleeding edge (or pretty close, especially compared to Debian's repositories).

I worked on that a little this weekend. Nutshell: I didn't get far due to the NCAA Tournament (#%@ USC!) and my decision that I'd much rather strip down Knoppix to leave the bits I'd need for pkgsrc than add it back in and restrip DSL-N of stuff that would eventually be upgraded, isn't needed for such a system, etc. I posted a (lack of) progress report:
< http://lucky13.blogsavy.com/2007/03/18/progress-report-10/ >

Last night I decided that it would be easier to just use a standard distro -- such as Slackware (which I've installed over Kubuntu and am now using with pkgsrc) or Debian or one of the BSDs -- for something like that than to build it atop a hard drive install of a live CD that would have to be restripped anyway. That's too much work when there are already much better solutions like Voltalinux and Bluewall already using Slack and Debian (respectively) with pkgsrc, not to mention the other OSes that can use pkgsrc.

If people want Ubuntu-like systems and want to use the Ubuntu repositories, it's a free download and they'll even send you a free CD. I would be disappointed if DSL-N turned into some branch of Ubuntu -- DSL-N deserves its own niche and should remain true to the spirit of DSL. Since there was nobody who expressed any interest and it's really not the kind of thing I'd use with DSL or DSL-N, I'm going to abandon this and stick with what already works for me.

Posted by lucky13 on Mar. 19 2007,15:07

Quote (Jason W @ Mar. 18 2007,23:42)

I would like to see DSL-N move forward, of course, and I would also like it to remain true to the DSL heritage of resource friendliness as well as relatively small size rather than be a full blown Linux live cd. � You can't have both at the same time and there are already enough full size live cd's out there in my opinion.

Posted by brian_t_s on Mar. 24 2007,16:01

I totally agree - I ended up back at DSL instead of DSL-N just because there wasn't a quick and simple way to get apt-get sorted. Would strongly suggest that this functionality is either

a) installed as part of the base distro; �or
b) there is a 'point and click' option to get it installed quickly.

b) seems to fit better with the 'small is beautiful' philosophy

I have ended up using DSL on an old machine, very pleased with it, but would have preferred the likes of DSL-N if this had been sorted....

Keep up the good work !

Posted by Beastie on April 04 2007,11:04

There were three competing video systems in the early 80's: VHS, Video 2000 and BETA. BETA was the system with the best specifications but we know VHS won (because they were sponsoring the publication of the movies on their system, so the range of available movies were a 100 times bigger).

A system only keeps alive as long as there is a need for it. DSL is a well structured system but the days running a 486 system will go by soon. I think DSL will need a new kernel and some improvement you are doing with DSL-N BUT most important is: You need any up-to-date package system more than making it easier to handle (it's simple enough).

All my server and desktop systems running on FreeBSD (I prefer BSD in many ways from any linux distro) which aren't bloated with apps. Is my DSL gateway server running on a 486 processor? No it isn't, not because it couldn't (a running 486 DX/66 FreeBSD 4.6
system stands in the cellar) it is because I have an old PIII for it.

I am really not an application junkie but using VIM fastens my life instead of using NVI etc. So I agree with this topic: Go further with DSL-N and add any up-to-date packaging system to it.

P.S.: I have no running Linux, but DSL-N looks like a good choice for a *nix system on a stick.

Posted by Beastie on April 04 2007,11:13

Some more technical things:

1. It would be a good idea to have DSL-N load its modules from MyDSLN instead of MyDSL, so having both on a CD is easier
2. Rename the KNOPPIX folder and FS file for DSL and DSL-N to "DSL" and "DSLN" (that also needs two lines changed in the linuxrc-file of minirt32.gz)