Petition for a bare DSL System
Forum: DSL Ideas and Suggestions
Topic: Petition for a bare DSL System
started by: slimeph
Posted by slimeph on Sep. 01 2006,08:12
< http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/dslbarebone >Here is a petition to have a bare/base dsl system only with the option to have a gui/not and probably add mydsl for extensions fetching.
Please give feedback.
Posted by bokaroseani on Sep. 01 2006,13:51
Although I agree to the petition, I would not suggest the DSL team to abandon providing the current OS with its selection of applications. I think DSL has already shown a clear focus in its development of a system that runs with minimal computing and memory resources. What I would like to see though is greater choice and ease of customizing. No distribution can be 'everything to everyone'. There are a number of us who like to just boot any available system with the CD and get running with whatever we want to do - browse the net or create a text document, for example, without having to download anything seperately. A bare-bone DSL would need us to first download the extension from the respository before we can start working.
I was introduced to linux through DSL about a year ago and have been following its development since then. I am amazed to see to what extent the developers have gone to reduce the RAM requirement to run a DSL system. The recent addition - uci extensions are truly great. There are of course more that can be done which I am sure will happen steadily with future releases. For example, I wonder if its possible to include applications in the CD so that when we use the cheatcode "toram" only the bare-bone system with GUI gets copied to RAM but all other applications (Firefox, VNC etc.) can be mounted from the CD (somewhat like UCI extensions) on as-per-need basis. These mountings can also be made possible during booting by making available new cheatcodes like "withapps" so that when we use the boot options "dsl toram withapps", the system will boot into something that looks like the current version of DSL with all its applications. Or something in these lines. Such an arrangement might allow folks with RAM as low as 64 MB to also run DSL using toram option fairly comfortably without compromising on giving up any of the applications that are currently part of the 50MB iso.
I will be interested in hearing what the more knowledgeable folks here think wrt these ideas.
Posted by WDef on Sep. 01 2006,19:32
| Quote |
| I would not suggest the DSL team to abandon providing the current OS with its selection of applications. |
Indeed. No cute lil' apps = no character or personality.
It's the efficient little apps, scripts etc that characterise dsl. Otherwise it's just a torso without limbs.
How much smaller does anyone need, and why?
Posted by bokaroseani on Sep. 01 2006,22:37
Well, 50mb is small enough but there will remain the scope to improve the performance of DSL systems even further. If not, the developers would close there shop and go for a long vacation. One way to do it would be to give more control to the user over what she/he uses their boxes for. Mountable uci extensions are a step in that direction. I am just proposing to take this idea to the next level where we can even control mounting of the core apps (Ted, Firefox, xMMs etc.) also. And this also will conform and extend the developers' one of the goals of keeping DSL as "nomadic".I am not a programmer. So I will not have any clue if these suggestions are impossible to achieve or not. I am just throwning an idea to the pool.
Posted by slimeph on Sep. 02 2006,01:06
majority of users of dsl would want to fully customize it according to their needs. thus, don't want the other excess apps and packages. some resolution about the core apps and packages will be devised, then would be the standard base system. one would then need to download his very own pick of apps he would want to incorporate.also the ability to burn it in an iso would be a plus.
Posted by humpty on Sep. 02 2006,15:38
>"The idea of remastering the dsl distribution is ok."I would think those who need such a small system would have the incentive work out how to remaster it.
It's hard to know where to draw the line, but let's not forget those who would be instantly put off if they are faced with a
command line or empty desktop?
Posted by seuchato on Sep. 03 2006,16:35
| Quote |
| =slimeph,Sep. 01 Here is a petition to have a bare/base dsl system only with the option to have a gui/not and probably add mydsl for extensions fetching. |
Hi there
My vote is for a truly bare DSL - as a parllel development. By no means DSL should be replaced by such a bare DSL. Let me call bare DSL BDSL and explain my point of view a bit.
Last couple of days I have been dealing with some request of wive and kids to have terminals at all ends in our house to play the vast mp3 collection, an individual alarm clock that plays a nice different song from an individual playlist and so on. For this purpose I got these nice PC104 single board pc's that I am installing/configuring since. The have all that's require on board. I am sure, after learning a bunch DSL will give me the freedom I need. But as a regular linux user, I would just love to work off a BDSL, just adding what I really need. Looked at this as an isolated point of view, that will not need a lot of consideration. If you derive what others individuals need would be, BDSL could just be the starting point for quite some mass customisation.
If someone would assist, I would volunteer to keep that 'BDSL' 'modern'. BDSL shoudl basically be a DSL that's able to run X, do networking, should include (imho) mc. there should be a set of scripts and howto's, to remaster it. scripts could be commandline driven (imho).
Greets Chris
PS: DSL -is- great:
pcm4283: 133 Mhz, 32MB ram, onboard 10BT nic: ran out of the box and is truly usable, impressive!