> >
> > Both of the above represent a LOT of machines, but neither
> needs a full
> > blown Linux system. These machines don't need multi-user or PPP
> > dial-in, or sendmail, telnet or FTP daemons etc. Therefore, a
> > distribution with these things taken out and replaced with a more
> > straightforward method of configuration would crack it. If
> it's bundled
> > with some good general applications as well then all the
> better. What
> > do you all think?
>
> How do you take out multiuser capabilities ??
> Moreover, they might not be necessary, but they are handy.
> Say, I want to
> continue my work at home... I log in with my "work" account, and
> everything is setup for my work...
> There is no need to take anything out. If I take out
> sendmail, I'll have
> to replace it with something else to handle my email...
>
>
OK, it's not *necessary* to take it out, or anything else for that
matter. My point was that if we had a "cut down" Linux (whatever that
means), then installation and configuration would be easier but it would
still satisfy the requirements of *most* desktop (not server) users.
This may mean that more people would be willing to at least try Linux
(Also, if a client on a network has access to a mail server, they don't
need sendmail either, just a POP3 client.)
Of course, "power" users, administrators, hackers, enthusiasts, whatever
can always put these things in if they want! Linux gives us this
flexibility sadly lacking in other systems!
Thanks for reading,
Martin
