No, rpmdrake works just fine with a CD. Indeed, it's the only way I've
ever used it personally.
On Sat, 08 Apr 2000, you wrote:
| By my mind rpmdrake need internet connection ??
| So what if updates or installs are necessary with the CD ?
| Eric
|
| > -----Original Message-----
| > From: Brian T. Schellenberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
| > Sent: Friday, April 07, 2000 11:49 PM
| > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| > Subject: Re: [Cooker] Distribution Style
| >
| >
| >
| > First, there isn't a need to make these into a single package; you just
| > need for the dependencies to get resolved as done by rpmdrake already
| > (but not by kpackage).
| >
| > Second, the general idea of having a less overwhelming "basic"
| > distirubtion to start is good, but make the kitchen sink available.
| >
| > I personally think that a look at Caldera OpenLinux is a pretty
| > good model of how to do a user-friendly install.
| >
| > But I still want to be *able* to select packages at install time.
| >
| > AND (this is big . . )
| >
| > I should be able select packages the *same* way at install time and
| > afterwards. The install-time package installer lets you select
| > multiple packages and resolves all dependencies, but I can't find
| > anything after I install that does this:
| >
| > - kpackage allows multiple selection but doesn't resolve dependencies;
| > - rpmdrake resolves dependencies but doesn't allow multiple selection.
| >
| > And I find both of them unnecessarily awkward in terms of "just
| > finding" my cdrom packages, though that may be my own fault due to
| > customization I've done.
| >
| >
| > On Fri, 07 Apr 2000, you wrote:
| > | I agree with you.. for instance what does joe computer user want with
| > | sendmail for instance since he most likely is used to use his isp's
| > | mailserver as smtp server..
| > |
| > | I hate to say this.. but take a look at windows and see what is
| > installed at
| > | the start.. very little infact..
| > |
| > | It would be alot cooler to have a nice menu some OBVIOUS place
| > where all the
| > | packages that can be installed is listed. And there should be 2
| > levels of
| > | that menu aswell (atleast) so you would have to select like
| > advanced to get
| > | to all the packages.
| > |
| > | As I see it now it is a bit too hard to get hold of the packages after I
| > | install my system. (I am speaking of joe computer user here
| > mind you :). And
| > | I think the descriptions should be even more informative than
| > they are. The
| > | description should be worked out with an enduser and not merely
| > by us geeks.
| > |
| > | Almost no joe computer user will ever want any -devel packages but he of
| > | course installs it right away since he has no idea that he wont need it.
| > |
| > | And he probably wonders why his newly installed linux machine has 15-20
| > | different text editors.
| > | (The really funny thing is that the most user friendly of them 'pico' is
| > | included in a mailreader and not as a text editor).
| > |
| > | I can probably go on all night with things to point out.. but I
| > guess you
| > | guys get it.
| > |
| > | The new graphical installer takes you far.. but it is still not
| > as easy as
| > | corel linux for instance..
| > | you need to go the last mile aswell.
| > |
| > | I would like to think that we (the users on cooker) can help
| > you guys out in
| > | selecting wich packages should go in the 'base' or what we
| > should call it.
| > |
| > |
| > | my 12 cents..
| > | Michael Irving
| > | ----- Original Message -----
| > | From: "Dalton Calford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| > | To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| > | Sent: Friday, April 07, 2000 10:12 PM
| > | Subject: [Cooker] Distribution Style
| > |
| > |
| > | > 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
| > | >
| > | >
| > --
| > "Brian, the man from babbleon-on" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| > Brian T. Schellenberger http://www.babbleon.org
| > Support http://www.eff.org. Support decss defendents.
| > Support http://www.programming-freedom.org. Boycott amazon.com.
| >
| >
--
"Brian, the man from babbleon-on" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brian T. Schellenberger http://www.babbleon.org
Support http://www.eff.org. Support decss defendents.
Support http://www.programming-freedom.org. Boycott amazon.com.
