.dsl extension versus raw synaptic app

Forum: myDSL Extensions (deprecated)
Topic: .dsl extension versus raw synaptic app
started by: WoofyDugfock

---

Posted by WoofyDugfock on Oct. 12 2004,05:58

Something I've been wondering ...

I've been running & restoring some apps installed with synaptic/apt-get as per

< http://damnsmalllinux.org/cgi-bin....;t=2843 >

Some, such as Pan, are about to become available as .dsl extensions.

What are the pros and cons of using a .dsl versus the same (working) app saved straight off synaptic?

---

Posted by roberts on Oct. 12 2004,06:50

Most noteable are the automatic menu and icons that the extensions supply. Also, the extension are usually slightly smaller in size as the  user who assembled them typically deletes the docs and man pages. Also, the extensions don't require the debian package management programs to be loaded. Therefore, for a liveCD or compressed image user the extensions use less ram and the uci uses by far the least amount of the ramdisk.

---

Posted by WoofyDugfock on Oct. 12 2004,07:21

Thanks. I can see that savings in ram and the menu/icon additions are a help to many users.

I suppose also the reinstall process at boot is a bit smoother - you see the .dsl's listed fairly clearly as opposed to a great army of libs marching down the screen.

---