User Feedback :: DSL 2.2 issues



After my 'Windows ME revisited' post, I decided to take some advice and play with DSL 2.2, here's the results...

(1): I like the better usage of ramdisk, however in a frugal install I noticed that RAM and Swap partition usage are uneven. The result; some apps crashed my WM.

(2): Some applications I use on a second myDSL cd at my job became 'stale' if uninitialized at startup (such as The Open Office UCI, and MAN UCI), and would not work unless I rebooted.

(3): aMSN crashed my system a few times while running live at work. Again I had to reboot.

(4): Needed to use the myDSL Broadcom drivers to get network connectivity at my job.

    Overall, I still think that the fixes made with the kernel roll-back don't really justify the issues created. I have switched back to 2.1b, and I would like to restate a statement I made in another post... Please consider multiple releases in order to satisfy multiple user types.
Please do not mix extension issues with the base system.

The DSL developers are not involved with the extensions.
They are created by the community and there is an approriate place in the mydsl section of the forums for their discussion.

The reasons for the kernel change and the road map ahead has been stated in the forums and will not be revisited.

It is up to the user if they wish to use to the latest release or not.
However bug fixes and new features are not going to be backported.

This reminds me when many users wanted to stay with the 2.4.22 kernel and stayed with 0.5.3.1 and resisted the then new kernel 2.4.26  dsl 0.6.x releases.

If you have newer hardware that dictates the 2.4.31 and it happens to work for you then stay with that release.

We have given the tools of mkmydsl to easily make a custom mydsl.iso and there is always the full Knoppix style remastering available.
Interesting, where may I find the road map ahead so that I can read it?

Also, I think it's worth my specifying that the extension problems I had did not occur with the DSL 2.1b... This might be an interoperability issue worth looking at, especially considering the popularity of OO.

Thanks for the remaster tips!
Out of curiosity, does that mean that if I wanted to whip-up some DSL remasters and offer them for release, then I could make a mention of them on this board for those interested?
Quote
Interesting, where may I find the road map ahead so that I can read it?

That, my friend,  says volumes about your recent posts. Really not hard to find

The extensions you mentioned predate 2.0.

Quote
Out of curiosity, does that mean that if I wanted to whip-up some DSL remasters and offer them for release, then I could make a mention of them on this board for those interested?

No, You would have to setup your own site just as these have
I guess a free OS must provide commercial support.  If you decide to rollback the kernel to provide for the needs of the people who follow and support you then you must clear it with the few who want to use it on other hardware.  I guess if I want you to make a version for the m6800 then you have to do it right?

I use old hardware but if you decide that you want to use new hardware and not support my hardware then I don't see how I (a free user) should be able to dictate to you that you cant'.  Shouldn't I have to use my own resources to build/buy an OS that will serve my purposes?  I don't see why I should be able to tell John or robert to build me a version because their version does not suit my needs.  There are so many versions out there and there have been so many posts as to how to use those versions with lower resources.  As I stated to the people involved with the 100 dollar laptop initiative, the DSL community will offer advice even if DSL is not the solution for everyone.  

No one demands DSL usage it will be used because it is what is needed not because it controls the market.
Next Page...
original here.