DSL Ideas and Suggestions :: wish list, 2.6



this is great news I allways wanted to install the Kdrive in a true debian distro
but lacked the know how .
I hope your new development keeps the tiny X that makes DSL so fast
best wishes in this new undertaking
Eariler in this thread I wrote
Quote
...once 4.1 is released I will likely pick up on my 2.6 project and see where is goes.


I released DSL v4.1 today. So I am now going to turn my attention to this new project.

I do not want to create "a me too" distro. I would let the project die before I let this happen.  I do not want to be included with The Convenient Fiction About Distributions

I do not have the time, inclination, or desire to begin from scratch. As I ranted about in other posts, I get no joy compiling the creative work of others. On the other hand, I have no problem giving credit where credit is due. Doing so (standing on the shoulders of others) is what freedom in software is all about.

I plan to start by putting together a very minimal base. I will be using much of my lua, murgaLua and Fltk as possible. This may look like a minimal version (tiny core) of DSL, but it will not be. It will not even support the same structure. No gtk1, no cloop, no MyDSL extensions (at least as we know them today). Newer more robust and capable support systems makes this possible.

This will likely be in 'development' longer than any other version of DSL. John did the first one, a 2.4.22 kernel, based on the business card knx distro. I created the 2.4.24, 2.4.26 (based on stripping  corresponding Knoppix versions) and finally 2.4.31 (by compiling and updating)..

I will likely call upon the community to become more involved when it comes to support of devices and hardware that I cannot afford or have access.

I wish to continue the DSL tradition (actually a real Unix mantra) that small is beautiful.Many in the past have asked for a tiny core. Well this will be such.

I would not suggest that anyone wait till "its ready". That date is undetermined.

DSL currently offers 10 Editions, five in the 3.x series, a stable, familiar, robust, and well documented system.
If you prefer single click application launchers and/or application menu driven, then 3.x should be your choice.

DSL offer the same 5 editions in the 4.x line. If you prefer folder, documents drag-n-drop, data aware, data centric system then 4.x is for you.

I will continue to support the latest releases of both series of DSL.

I just feel that I need to begin the process to offer something 2.6 based. Something to build upon and not something to strip down. DSL-N was a project that began to try to strip Knoppix 4.02 but Knoppix was too much of a moving target and there was still too much that I wanted to accomplish with the 2.4 kernel based systems.  And of course I was very busy writing a book. DSL-N suffered from both lack of community interest and lack of my available time and attention. Support systems technology has also moved on and imporved so that it is not a viable option to continue DSL-N.

It may likely be a long road. But it is time.
Great - I'll buy a new usb stick in anticipation of the testing :)
Robert,

I tip my hat off to you for taking on the new challenge.  I'm very much looking forward to the 2.6 kernel based tiny OS and know that it will be of the highest quality because of the man who's building it.

With my utmost respect,
John
Quote (jpeters @ Nov. 22 2007,02:38)
It might be fun to have a stripped down dsl with 2.6 kernel just for experimenting; say no apps other then a terminal, very minimal desktop, etc.  (i.e., device centric).

I have such with a couple of images. But it seems like trying to be Debian is a catch-22. If I am true Debian, adding X, will bloat us immensely. If I sneak in a tinyX, which I have, then I can, of course, go non-Debian to add other X apps. But if you try to add an X app via Debian, here comes the bloat. Perhaps that is why, or so it seems, that every small 2.6 distro have choosen slackware as it base. Debian dependencies are great on a real hard drive, but when building something very small, I am not so sure.

Perhaps the approach to take is to "sneak in", i.e., non-Debian, a minimum of tinyX, a tiny WM, an xterm. Lets this tiny core be under the Debian radar. Then if a user wants to install true Debian apps and does not mind the size, they can. The downsize is that it is not very useful. Oh well, just thinking out loud. Care to join in?
Next Page...
original here.