iB::Topic::Should DSL-N start moving forward?

	Damn Small Linux :: Damn Small Linux Board The DSL Forums

» Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

Damn Small Linux Board » DSL Not » DSL-N » Should DSL-N start moving forward?

		Mini-ITX Boards Sale, Fanless BareBones Mini-ITX, Bootable 1G DSL USBs, 533MHz Fanless PC <-- SALE $200 each!
		Get The Official Damn Small Linux Book. DSL Market , Great VPS hosting provided by Tektonic

Question: Should DSL-N start moving forward? :: Total Votes:20
Poll choices	Votes	Statistics
Yes, in a direction just like it was before development stalled.	1	[5.00%]
Yes, in a direction similar to DSL 4 (integrated drag and drop desktop, etc.) but with GTK2, more modern apps, etc.	5	[25.00%]
Yes, it should be a 2.6 version of DSL 4 with GTK1 by default and GTK2 by extension.	3	[15.00%]
Yes, but I want apt-get.	6	[30.00%]
Yes, but make it more modular even if it means starting over from the ground-up.	0	[0.00%]
Yes to at least one of the above or to something else, and it should be community-developed if the developers don't want to move it forward themselves.	3	[15.00%]
Nope, long live RC4!	0	[0.00%]
Something else (please explain below).	2	[10.00%]
Guests cannot vote

Pages: (8) </ 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... >/

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

Topic: Should DSL-N start moving forward?, is it time?

< Next Oldest | Next Newest >

stupid_idiot Offline

Group: Members
Posts: 344
Joined: Oct. 2006

Posted: July 29 2007,08:55

I voted for:
Say goodbye to DSL-N.
Puppy Linux is probably a better GTK2 environment. It is better-supported (It is updated much more frequently, and it has a big user community) and it has tons more software.
Technically, Puppy is the better choice for someone who wants GTK2 and wants it small.
The question is: What can DSL-N offer that Puppy can't?

lucky13

Group: Members
Posts: 1478
Joined: Feb. 2007

Posted: July 29 2007,11:36

Quote

The question is: What can DSL-N offer that Puppy can't?

For starters:
Security. Puppy runs as root. DSL-N doesn't (not exclusively).

Bloat-free philosophy. Puppy is small on the CD. Take a look at its packages. Puppy's philosophy isn't to remain free of bloat. DSL-N's is.

Want more reasons? The root-only is enough to keep me from using it. I left that behind when I went from DOS to WinNT, which was the first Windows version to separate system administration privileges from normal user privileges. I'm not going to revert to using Linux in a manner I found objectionable, impractical, and insecure in Windows. And that's what Puppy is -- a version of Linux that functions more like Windows 95 than Linux.

--------------
"It felt kind of like having a pitbull terrier on my rear end."
-- meo (copyright(c)2008, all rights reserved)

Juanito

Group: Members
Posts: 1601
Joined: Sep. 2005

Posted: July 29 2007,12:58

Quote

Just out of curiosity, why apt-get (especially if you mean over MyDSL extensions if they were available and instead of Debian or *buntu)?

I don't think it's central to this discussion, but apt-get and many of the DSL extensions work fine for me in DSL-N.

lucky13

Group: Members
Posts: 1478
Joined: Feb. 2007

Posted: July 29 2007,13:57

Quote

I don't think it's central to this discussion, but apt-get and many of the DSL extensions work fine for me in DSL-N.

Actually, it should be part of the discussion. Should DSL and DSL-N be as compatible with each other as possible or should they both be totally separate? And the choice about apt-get can be interpreted broadly (encompassing Ubuntu's repositories) or more narrowly to a particular Debian repository (e.g., Woody, Sarge, testing, etc.).

--------------
"It felt kind of like having a pitbull terrier on my rear end."
-- meo (copyright(c)2008, all rights reserved)

Key

Group: Members
Posts: 115
Joined: Mar. 2006

Posted: July 29 2007,14:58

Sorry, I hit the wrong button and did therefore a null-vote.
I would have voted for:

"Yes to at least one of the above or to something else, and it should be community-developed if the developers don't want to move it forward themselves".

With DSL 4 alpha and the 2.4.x kernel, I have problems with booting the DSL live-CD from an SATA-CD/DVD drive and also I do not get an automatic internet access with my new computer.
I assume, that my new hardware is not supported from the 2.4.x kernel.

The only thing I want CURRENTLY is a working DSL.
Does not matter if it is DSL or DSL-N.
But it should have a 2.6.x kernel.
The current DSL-N image is now nearly 1 year old.
My mouse does not function with DSL-N 0.1 RC4, but my mouse functions well with DSL 4 alpha, therefore I think there is no problem to fix this issue with a newer DSL-N version.

I know that there is high priority for DSL and the 2.4.x kernel, but I hope that I do not have to wait further months till there is a DSL/DSL-N that is working on newer computers.

Yes, there is Puppy and there is Slack etc etc ..
But also when they have common properties, there are differences.
I had a look to a previous version of Puppy.
I did not like the design of Puppy and some other things.
I hope to get a working DSL/DSL-N again.
I think all I need is a 2.6.x kernel

At the moment, DSL lovers with very new computers can only use a DSL-N version which has not been further developed (at least no new images) since months.

The look of DSL-N should be the same classic look as in DSL.
I would prever an easy blue background with some color structure instead of having a real picture in the background.

35 replies since July 28 2007,16:56

< Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

Pages: (8) </ 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... >/

Damn Small Linux Board » DSL Not » DSL-N » Should DSL-N start moving forward?