Other Help Topics :: DSL Editions



Quote (cmanb @ June 17 2008,18:36)
Do you mean in the sense that users will need to create/use extensions to enhance functionality?

Absolutely.

Tiny Core will basically be a base to build the OS of your liking. You will either need to understand how to build extensions or will have to be patient and hope someone builds something you want to have. It's not going to be for the new Linux user. My hope (and I know Robert's) is that this core will inspire the community to build extensions to make tiny core a very flexible system.

Personally, I can't wait.

Chris
Quote (clivesay @ June 17 2008,16:46)
Quote (cmanb @ June 17 2008,18:36)
Do you mean in the sense that users will need to create/use extensions to enhance functionality?

Absolutely.

Tiny Core will basically be a base to build the OS of your liking. You will either need to understand how to build extensions or will have to be patient and hope someone builds something you want to have. It's not going to be for the new Linux user. My hope (and I know Robert's) is that this core will inspire the community to build extensions to make tiny core a very flexible system.

Personally, I can't wait.

Chris

But the extensions that currently exist will work with Tinycore, right?

I guess what will need to happen is people will need to build extensions to replace bits of DSL that currently exist, should they wish to retain them.

I can surely see the benefit here.  It seems like it could produce your ultimate Remaster, whatever that may mean to you.
Quote
I can surely see the benefit here.  It seems like it could produce your ultimate Remaster, whatever that may mean to you.

That's part of the idea. The more modular it is, the more freedom and control over it YOU will have whether you want remasters or to use it however you want. It also means fewer 'pieces' in the core to maintain so it can stay relatively fresh and easily updated. All that and better modern hardware support...
cmanb wrote
Quote
... But the extensions that currently exist will work with Tinycore, right?

No. Not necessarily. There is no libc5 in tiny core. There is no gtk1 in tiny core. These can be made into or combined into extensions.

It is for the above reason that I have decided to change the extensions filename extension. I have gone through this once before when everyone expected all extensions of DSL to run in DSL-N. Well, this time I don't want to hear it.

I am looking at using lzma and  the extension of .tlz in lieu of .dsl/tar.gz. I will post, as an example only, a gtk1.tlz, emelfm.tlz and dillo.tlz. I do not want to compete in the extension area. I would rather let that remain the community's domain.

We will need a new section of the repository for core. I will be setting that up shortly. Once existing extensions are known to work with core then they can be repacked using lzma so that core is able to process them.

Tiny Core is like clivesay said,
Quote
It's not going to be for the new Linux user.

And like what lucky13 said:
Quote
It also means fewer 'pieces' in the core to maintain so it can stay relatively fresh and easily updated.


Tiny Core will be known as dslcore. It is not DSL v5. It is not going to be immediately useful. It is being released to leverage the community's knowledge of the mydsl extension system and inbuilt tiny gui widget set of fltk used alone or via Lua.
Once this new dslcore and repository section are in place, I will likely not be involved with updating any past extensions or scripts that were designed for DSL, since dslcore is what I have been hoping for since I first found DSL.  My focus will likely be on dslcore only.  Of course the scripts I wrote for DSL are completely open, so anyone who wants to maintain them for DSL is welcome.
Next Page...
original here.