Re: The Distribution

[Gregory Bell <winston@atlantic.net>]

George Bonser wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Jan 1998, Gregory Bell wrote:
>
> >  And have SEUL held hostage by debian,  This is pure bull pucky,
> there is
> > nothing in theinstallation of Linux that requires it to be Debian.  Has anyone
> > bothered to look at what
> > programs/scripts are used when installing a new Linux system on a computer.
> > Let's see,
> > off the top of my head: makedev (a script), mk2efs (for the basic file system),
> > mkdir (shell command),
> > geeze nothing that points to Debian or Redhat.  Hummm why the instance on a
> > Debian install????
>
> Because it already exists.  We can START by adopting it and improve it as

 So does LST and a number of others, it seems to me that you want SEUL to dothe work
for Debians benifit.

> we go along and offer the improvements back to the community.  The debian
> install is not much more than a menuing system using dialog that provides
> a front end for such things as you speak of above. Where's your beef?

What's my beef, well really it comes in two parts.  If debian is so good, then
whythere a need for SEUL??  If Seul takes on the programs of the past then it also
takes on the misconceptions of those programs.  We have a chance to start fresh
here, why limit ourselves???
THE BEEF, part 2;  I have been using Linux since .9x days and have come to the
conclusion that there is a fatal flaw with the mindset of Linux/Unix users.  I
recieve
Linux announce newsgroup every day and have yet to see any, for me anyway,
original programs let alone the KILLER APP.  This goes back to when Unix was
first developed, which is besides the point.  The basic idea is to reuse programs
and/or alter existing programs to fit your needs.  Before you start saying, what is
this guy a nut, why not use/reuse code isn't that part of the GPL.  I am not against
doing things that way and for certain times it is really a nice thing to have
available.
But when you are attempting something new, relying on the old in many cases
while it gets the job done, is not the best solution.  So what you end up with is
a mish-mash of old ways of thinking with new ways appended on.

> >   This is kinda silly, take a look at www.tigerdirect.com and get familiar
> > withwhat kinds of systems are being sold.
>
> And your point is?  That is the problem, there are too many different
> kinds of systems being sold.  At the start, we put the system in some
> configuration that is known to work on darned near every computer on the
> planet.  The goal is to get a useable GUI running to "bootstrap" the rest
> of the install. It can always be beefed up later but we probably do not
> want out install program to be huge. A script that generates a rather
> generic XF86Config file based on the answers to those questions are all we
> need to get started.

 How your horses, there buckroo.  Take a look at your basic system.  A processor(in
this case an X86 chip), a video card (mostly SVGA), a hard drive (EIDE), memory,
and a monitor (mostly multisync)  what's so difficult????  Remember this is for a
first time user whose computer comes from a factory, no modifications.

> > > Do you have a Multisync monitor?
> >
> >   Can you buy a new computer system today without a multisync monitor???
>
> Who cares, there are millions of PC's out there without one. One of the
> benefits of Linux is that it performs well with older hardware. I think we
> should keep it that way.

  True but unless things have changed, SEUL is not aimed at the millions of PC's
outthere.  The target audience is, if memory serves the user that is currently
running windows95
and wants to try something different (for what ever reason).  Again point to at least
a 486
computer

> >  Here you are wrong, right now the distrobution consists of nothing but a bunch
> > ofsaved messages.  I have seen nothing (less twoducks help system) that would,
> > by
> > any definition of the word, be discribed as a program much less a distribution.
>
> Lets see, we have been all of what ... three days since we decided to
> really get serious?  DO you work for Microsoft? :)

  And in those three days none other than yourself has said I can't continue UNTIL
the nextversion of debian comes out.  And we know who your associations are with.

> THere is no cross-purpose, it was decided that it would be debian-based.

 Hummm I was never asked about this, neither was at least one other person thatI have
had contact with.  For all intents and purposes you are attempting to push
Debian down the throats of everyone on the SEUL list.

> George Bonser
> If NT is the answer, you didn't understand the question. (NOTE: Stolen sig)
> http://www.debian.org
> Debian/GNU Linux ... the maintainable operating system.

  Oh and just as a side note, I have never used debian.  The reasoning for this is
that
the three or four times I have downloaded and attempted to install, it never worked.

    Greg