Does anyone have any particular preferences on distributions for use
with LTSP ?. I have been told that RedHat tends to contain loads of
patches, rather than cleanly compiled code. Is that justified ?.
Shane
_
Ltsp-discuss
Ok, I know there have been several strange questions
passed by me in the recent past. I need some serious
imput from people in ltsp. At my work we are building
a new distribution of linux. I have been talking with
many other groups of people and It seams like this
will be a incredibly unique ve
A lot of good input so far on ideas for our linux
distro. Here hopefully are some anwsers.
Distro Levels. There will be 4 different distro
areas. Desktop, Laptop, Tradional Server, and A full
terminal distro, that includes whole setup for the
ltsp, includeing useful wizards.
Some of the plan
The world could use a few more distros. heheh
Anyone know what the count is now?
All my clients demand RedHat.
Have fun.
sounds stranger than Sorcerer even.
>A lot of good input so far on ideas for our linux
>distro. Here hopefully are some anwsers.
>Distro Levels. There will be 4 differ
Unix is too broken to fix. Why don't you get in on the ground floor of
the next great OS? Plan9
It is written by the guys who wrote Unix. They are the ones that say
Unix is too broken to fix.
http://freshmeat.net/projects/plan9/?topic_id=864
http://plan9.bell-labs.com/plan9dist/
I have thr
Am I the only one who thinks this thread needs to go somewhere else.
This is LTSP after all. Not New Distro of the week. As an early
adopter of all new weird Linux distros, I will prolly try it, but it is
taking too much bandwidth here and no one will trim the posts to try to
make it bearable e
Mandrake does LTSP very cleanly. I like the desktop enhancements as well,
such as wm menu syncronization and others. But its purely personal
prefrence.
On Fri, 5 Oct 2001, Shane Kennedy wrote:
> Does anyone have any particular preferences on distributions for use
> with LTSP ?. I have been t
Am Freitag, 5. Oktober 2001 10:24 schrieb Shane Kennedy:
> Does anyone have any particular preferences on distributions for use
> with LTSP ?. I have been told that RedHat tends to contain loads of
> patches, rather than cleanly compiled code. Is that justified ?.
I have heard of that too, but
1. Ensure the utmost in synergistic use of software by ensuring multiple
instances of applications share as much as possible rather than loading
redundant instances... such as in executible code and cached files
(icons, graphics, web pages, etc. etc.)
2. Ensure everything works out of the box
This is a good list. I would add that you need some way of supporting MS-Windoze apps
in 'ghetto' mode. There are many niche apps out there that are only available under
MS-Windoze. Sooner or later you have to work out a way of handling them - either by
having a few pure Windoze machines in a '
John McCreesh wrote:
> This is a good list. I would add that you need some way of supporting MS-Windoze
>apps in 'ghetto' mode. There are many niche apps out there that are only available
>under MS-Windoze. Sooner or later you have to work out a way of handling them -
>either by having a few p
On Sun, 28 Apr 2002 07:12:09 -0700
Dave Shiels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I like openoffice but it doesn't import WORD docs very well. Most of
>
> the text formatting is OK but the graphics are trashed. Any hints?
Nothing obvious - I regularly exchange stuff in .doc format with MS-Word users
On Sun, 28 Apr 2002, John McCreesh wrote:
> This is a good list. I would add that you need some way of supporting MS-Windoze
>apps in 'ghetto' mode. There are many niche apps out there that are only available
>under MS-Windoze. Sooner or later you have to work out a way of handling them -
>e
On Sun, 28 Apr 2002 19:52:11 -0700 (PDT)
mslicker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> I paid for StarOffice back at version 5.0 and find that the 5.2 version
> handles MS Word documents very well, including the graphics. It seems to
> me like they broke a few things in the OpenOffice version an
mslicker wrote:
>
> 1. Ensure the utmost in synergistic use of software by ensuring multiple
> instances of applications share as much as possible
> 2. Ensure everything works out of the box. select one app for each
> major purpose and ensure it works perfectly ... (with) help pages
> It shou
> > c. Browing the web (ensure flash, PDF, and real media works! And
> > ensure fonts are OK sized)
> c) I don't know of any web browser that does all of this perfectly.
I think if you use mozilla and combine it with the crossover plugin so
you use flash from windows you're very close. Has an
Hi,
I just have one question regarding the packaging system: How are you
going to face it? RPMs, DEBs, or perhaps something else?
Regards,
El vie, 03-05-2002 a las 01:21, david scott escribió:
> A lot of good input so far on ideas for our linux
> distro. Here hopefully are some anwse
Aanhalen Dario Rapisardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi,
> I just have one question regarding the packaging system: How are you
> going to face it? RPMs, DEBs, or perhaps something else?
>
> Regards,
If you absolutely must make your own distro (why?) for christ's sake go for .deb.
Frank
___
On Thu, 2 May 2002 21:21:19 -0700 (PDT)
david scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A lot of good input so far on ideas for our linux
> distro. Here hopefully are some anwsers.
[snip]
Seriously guys, the world is full of Linux distros that have started off
full of good ideas and have fallen flat
John,
Well said :)
Jim.
On Fri, 3 May 2002, John McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 2 May 2002 21:21:19 -0700 (PDT)
> david scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > A lot of good input so far on ideas for our linux
> > distro. Here hopefully are some anwsers.
>
> [snip]
>
> Seriously guys, the worl
hello, that was a point purposfully not mentioned.
Truth is, don't know that. It will take
experimentation, and feedback. so far looks either
debian or maybe a bsd ports style. Input?
--- Dario Rapisardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> I just have one question regarding the packagin
The easiest way to say this, because a lot of the
things that will happen are needed. Yes, it is true
that a lot of distros start out with good ideas,
however there are many reasons why a distro can fail.
One of the biggest is financial backing. Linux is a
set of great ideas, however, a lot of
Sorry, last comment for now, history class teaches us
an amazing thing, throught time, invention and
reinvention has happend, in our time, people couldn't
posibly understand that we would use more than 2 mb of
memory, it was thoughtless. Microsoft at one point,
why use it? When we have this won
On Saturday 04 May 2002 05:56 am, david scott wrote:
> The easiest way to say this, because a lot of the
> things that will happen are needed. Yes, it is true
> that a lot of distros start out with good ideas,
> however there are many reasons why a distro can fail.
> One of the biggest is financi
Hello Frank
I do disagree with several of the points your making,
however you make great points. If someone did only
include "5" apps, well I imagine its ease would go
right out the window. And you are right, these guys
have spend a great deal of time, making small changes
to packages already a
Ok you're making some very clear and concise points here. I'll try to respond
the best I can (and try to show you're wrong at some of them ;) ).
On Monday 06 May 2002 12:27 am, you wrote:
> Hello Frank
>
> I do disagree with several of the points your making,
> however you make great points. If
--- Frank Van Damme
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok you're making some very clear and concise points
> here. I'll try to respond
> the best I can (and try to show you're wrong at some
> of them ;) ).
>
> On Monday 06 May 2002 12:27 am, you wrote:
> > Hello Frank
> >
> > I do disagree with sever
2nd part of message...
>Otoh, there is microsoft, who has the advantage you
>only have to bother
>about
>support and updates for most of your software. This
>has several
>disadantages
>(lock-in pe) but at least it looks all easy. A
>windows system is
>develloped
>to make the admin or the us
What is the big deal about your own distribution?? Redhat is a running a
commercial operation. I have tried all the main ones, starting with
Slackware, Redhat, debian, Suse, Mandrake. Also the BSD's FreeBSD,
OpenBSD etc. Also Solaris, they are all basically Unix. None of these
companies have actua
On Mon, 29 Apr 2002, John McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Apr 2002 19:52:11 -0700 (PDT)
> mslicker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > I paid for StarOffice back at version 5.0 and find that the 5.2 version
> > handles MS Word documents very well, including the graphics. It seems to
> >
My thoughts exactly. However, once can get all of the items in "c" to
work. The desktop database in the MS Access class is clearly missing, yet
very crucial point in the Linux desktop for small business and corporate
departments.
--Mattew
On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, David Johnston wrote:
> mslick
I thought we had pretty much wore out this discussion of
a new linux distro.
If not, please take it to another mailing list, where
it would be more appropriate.
Thanks,
Jim McQuillan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 9 May 2002, mslicker wrote:
>
>
> My thoughts exactly. However, once can get al
32 matches
Mail list logo
