User Feedback :: Win ME revisited?!!



I disagree with the premise of this argument.

Kernel version 2.4.31 is not "bloated" in any context other than if you compare it to version 2.4.26 and it's lack of hardware support for SATA disk controllers and other hardware.

There are definitely hardware issues related to DSL + vanilla 2.4.31 kernel + latest ndiswrapper that don't exist with knoppix3.4/DSL 2.4.26
However, it is unproven that these issues are related to the size of the kernel+modules and more likely due to some other cause like errors created during the backporting of kernel drivers or optimization of some code for multiprocessing.

Although a very popular use for DSL is reviving older computer systems, this is not the only way to use DSL.

For example, it is also popular to use DSL as a "portable OS" that is run from livecd or from a USB pendrive.
With nearly 100% of computer manufacturing since 2004 being computers with SATA hard drives and controllers, it is very difficult to use DSL/2.4.26 as a "portable OS" on modern hardware and have the ability to read/write to the hard drive.

So while I can understand the reasons why DSL was rolled back to the 2.4.26 kernel, I take issue with comparing the 2.4.31 kernel to bloatware.

In fact, I am sure that there will be some users who will continue to use DSL 2.1b until the next generation DSL-like 2.6 kernel OS is released for testing.

And none of them are doing it because they prefer bloatware.
I concur... While DSL is great for reviving old systems, PC component manufacturers aren't going to keep pumping out remakes of old hardware configurations. In addition, there are a few really good archive FTP sites that you can get older kernel versions from if hardware revival is needed.

I can certainly agree with the need for older hardware revival, however as I mentioned earlier. More driver support will be needed rather than lose the ability to keep up with new hardware needs.
Quote (doobit @ Feb. 13 2006,09:21)
...  I like choices. I was against JWM at first because it looked too much like Win$. However, it turns out to be more memory efficient than Fluxbox, so it's a better choice on my low memory machines.

Mandriva gives you a whole list of desktop choices on it's boot splash screen. Ubuntu gives you either KDE or Gnome, if you have them both installed, I don't know about the others, but it's part of the concept of freedom to have choices.

Of course we all like choices but two window managers?  Either JWM or Fluxbox but both of them are redundant... See, having two programs that do the same is inefficient in my opinion.  

Compile a newer version of the kernel and optimize the rest...  

Rgds,
The kernel roleback was not because of size but because we have overall more functionality with .26 than with .31.  It was not a decision we took lightly.     I don't think people realize how much work is put into each end every release.

Poppe, our release schedule has worked very well for us over the last three years.  Remember, this is free software, and having an aggressive release schedule helps the distribution's development and momentum.

Re adding JWM:
Our version (personally hacked my Robert) is has a very small fingerprint, sitting at only  100k, or about 1/6th the size of Fluxbox.

We have other redundancies too, but they are all justified.
Not sure if it is related or not but going to the newer kernel I seem to have lost fan control on my Armada 7800 (cpu was getting so hot it shut the machine down and now, due to the heat, I have a line down the left side of my screen anoying but my own fault).  It worked fine under DSL1.5 but does not work with 2.0.  I am going to use 2.2 and see what happens.

No distro can be all things to all people and there are plenty of distros to choose from.  DSL in my opinion is a great medium and serves it's purpose very well.  I have older hardware and now rely on DSL for that hardware.
Next Page...
original here.