DSL Ideas and Suggestions :: remove the hd install script

hi,

here´s my point of view:

the good thing about dsl (and my reason for choosing it) is and was the varitey of ways to use it. This is exactly what i was looking for:

a small system which has everything you need for your daily work (and some more), runs on old hardware, can be installed to a harddrive, is portable (meaning it runs on nearly everything u can call computer) to have always the same workspace, is highly configurable and of course it´s free (in all)! The point is that the you (as user) have the choice. On the system i use it isn´t very comfortable to run DSL of a CD. Having it running just in RAM is totaly impossible on this system. Using the myDSL extensions on such a system causes a freeze (i guess it´s cause the lack of RAM) so it´s not possible to do a frugal-install.

I am really happy that it is possible to make a hd-unstall.

Thanks for your attention

Greetz
Escay

I agree...I use a hd install and am playing with frugal install trying to figure it out..

.many use the hd install but it is the desire of dsl to promote the frugal and like feedback in this regard...

there was mention of a appless version and my newbie notes were seemingly unwelcome so I thought that perhaps deleting the option from dsl and going strictly frugal and leaveing the option in the appless was a way to improve the seeming negativity surrounding the hd install.

this was only a SUGGESTION.. it would in fact force the desired frugal design..and older versions such as the 2.2 I am useing still offer hd install..the hd install will not be improved or recommended..

the synaptic will soon be a very frustrating experience. I think hd installs with .dsl extensions work very well with the knowledge that uninstall of the extensions is not available

choice is great and is available..I do not anticipate a suggestion being considered...it was compelled by observation.

Just wanted to say that I am glad the HD install is there. When I first downloaded DSL 2.2, I did the HD install on a 200 MHz pentium, 64M, 2.5G HD because that's the way I had done it with a slackware CD I got at a yard sell. I didn't know the difference between frugal and regular HD. I was trilled with DSL right away as I never could get X to work in slackware. I finally broke my DSL HD install when I mounted a UCI package. Then I started reading the forum and this time I tried a frugal install for a couple of days. I gave up on the frugal install because all of the mydsl packages would not install in my limited ram. If there is a way to have packages installed to the HD in frugal let me know. I like something that is hard to break.

Thanks,
Mike

Some of you may already know I stand firmly in the frugal camp, but even I think taking away the HD install is too drastic. For those who don't really need it is partly the psychology of feeling comfortable that the stuff sits securely on HD and not taking up valuable ram.
What they really need is a 'scare factor', i.e a warning before installing e.g "this operation may seriously screw up your life",
"you may not complain in the forums", "you may not pass go.."
:laugh:

I just finished HD-installing DSL in a toshiba 7020ct. I did this because I didn't understand, and still don't, what a frugal install is and what the differences are between them. Also, being new to linux, the only way i've known to install the os is to the hd. I wish there was a table or something that compares hd installs to frugal, in a way that is easy to read and understand.

I have to add that out of all the distros i've tried (ubunu, vector, debian, pocket), DSL was great out of the box. Minor tweaking was done to the xserver, but It's made my life much easier!

Next Page...
original here.