+1 with Brenton 2012/5/10, Brenton Edgar Scott <[email protected]>: > *Sigh* This is like comparing Ubuntu to Arch and equally productive. > DSL had Debian as an back-end and it's developers didn't have to lift a > finger to fix half the issues we have to. Modern these days is using a > properly configured xorg that automatically generates the configuration > every boot and a system that uses udev exclusively (and left HAL > behind). 99% of the libraries DSL used has bloated a big and probably > tripped in size by now. The playing field isn't even anymore. This is > half why I get so pissed off when people compare SliTaz with other > distros. I think the only fair comparison would be TinyCore and then > only barely. Puppy had years to adapt to the proper way of doing > things, it's creator is pretty clued up and with it's current large > user/developer base it's pretty up to date. Arch has the same advantage > and all the others are based on some pretty distros. We don't have that > luxury and we're still learning. > > So please instead of comparing or complaining, rather use that energy > into helping us conform the standards and teaching us how to use xorg, > the linux kernel and udev effectively. > > -- > SliTaz GNU/Linux Mailing list - http://www.slitaz.org/ > >
-- Lamkomsel, TML http://www.ajinalo.com -- SliTaz GNU/Linux Mailing list - http://www.slitaz.org/
