I totally agree with you, Dalton, but I would like to add a couple of points.
If software is installed, the user should know its there. Put shortcus to
applications into KDE and GNOME menus. I find it very annoying that Mandrake
includes AbiWord but doesn't add it to any application menus.
It would be very nice if every installed gui application was listed somewhere
in the GNOME/KDE application menu.
I too want the default install to be much smaller since manyh potentially
unneeded packages are installed.
For example wine and wine-debug....why is wine-debug installled and is wasting
my space?
Dalton Calford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have been using Mandrake since version 5.3, in fact, I learned linux
> via mandrake and have always supported the distribution (yes, even with
> buying copies...)
>
> The one thing that I found as a begginer and even now that I am getting
> truly familiar with the system, is that Mandrake, like most of the linux
> distributions, is suffering from software bloat.
>
> Too much is included with the base system. It confuses the user.
> Alot gets installed, and never gets used.
> A new user does not know what is needed and what isn't but they must
> either accept the few hundred meg of software or go through a confusing
> selection process that they have no way of understanding.
>
> I have to say that I prefer mandrake over the others but, I think there
> is a better method of handling this.
>
> Mandrake should be split into a 'base' package and then all the other
> packages put into stand alone installs.
>
> What should be in the 'base'?
> I would suggest X, a trimmed down version of KDE and all the graphical
> configuration tools.
>
> Why not emacs and joe and all the other handy-dandy utilities?
>
> For the basic user, all those utilities just waste disk space.
> Mandrake is filling the 'Entry level Linux' for windows users who want
> to walk on the wild side.
>
> There should be packages that maintain all the different possible uses a
> person may want including things like Licq or Apache, but, these things
> (including VNC) should not be standard parts of the installation.
>
> The packages should be standalone in that they contain in one place all
> the libs and required files so that when you install the package you do
> not need to go looking for updates to other packages just so you can run
> it.
>
> This way, a end user can easily add to thier system without worrying
> about getting other unneeded programs that might be security holes.
>
> If a user wants emacs, install the emacs package, if they want to surf
> the web, add a program that does it.
>
> At our office, we remove all browsers and make sure the firewall stops
> all such traffic, but the standard linux installs include Netscape as a
> default choice.
>
> The people who have made this distribution have done an excellent job,
> but, too much of Redhats legacy of 'everything and the kitchen sink' has
> got it bogged down.
>
> What I am suggesting, is, stepping back and spliting the developement
> into two areas
> 1) a very basic linux system with very little on it.
> 2) add-on packages to extend the basic system.
>
> A basic system of 80-100 MB (even less if possible) that becomes the
> stepping stone of the distribution that allows everything else to be
> added would make downloads and installations faster and more reliable.
>
> A smaller system with limited items in it allow the user to learn one
> thing at a time instead of having everything in his face at once.
>
> I hope I have not offended anyone with this suggestion, and that perhaps
> it can lead to some discussion on how to make the distribution a little
> better.
>
> best regards
>
> Dalton
____________________________________________________________________
Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
