Corporate creep in Linux? (mini-rantette)
in [Slackware]
|
From: Mike Jones on 10 Sep 2009 19:36 Responding to Keith Keller: > On 2009-09-10, Leonard the Committed <leothecomm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I agree with this part of the post. The reason I've stuck with >> Slackware was the obvious lack of auto-this and that which always >> seemed to glitch on the other distro's I've tried. > > This is a stated design goal of Slackware--as much as possible, rely on > the various packages' configuration tools instead of writing new, > distro- specific, replacements. This is more of the principle of "don't > modify packages", which is why Slackware ships with a stock kernel > instead of a mildly- to heavily-modified one like many others do. > The "A-Team Action-Vehicle" factor is a strength of Slackware. My problem is that some of the components that are appearing are / replacing/ things we used to be able to set up manually. Imagine an A-Team "special build" with automatic windows, auto- transmission, sat-nav, cruise control, etc. Not quite the same thing. And, due to this creeping "no choice coz its standard now" automation, we stand at the cusp of a Linux system finally telling us "I'm sorry Dave. I can't allow you to do that." I don't like it. Not one bit. Slackware should be the easy option to LFS, not a reason to use LFS, and I see the slow drift toward that happening with the (feature-creeping bloat-ware, lets admit it) automated stuff that should be optional, not a direct replacement for what was standard and had nothing wrong with it. Bah! Humbug! >:( -- *===( http://www.400monkeys.com/God/ *===( http://principiadiscordia.com/ *===( http://www.slackware.com/
From: ~kurt on 10 Sep 2009 21:24 dae3 <7252d9cf(a)example.invalid> wrote: > ~kurt <actinouranium(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > >> I believe pretty much every distro is "From Scratch". > > > Most existing distros are based on some other distro. > Oh, I see what you are saying.... But they are still built from scratch. I'm not sure if you have given LFS a try - even it has become pretty much a distro now days. It started off as a document that told you *how* to go about building your own distro. Now days, it is a step by step cookbook, and you can even download "packages" that you compile. When following the current directions, pretty much anyone who gives it a shot will end up with the same system. What is nice is anyone with pretty much any experience level can give it a try - and learn as much as they want out of it. But, someone who *needs* LFS to produce their own distro probably won't have the ability to do anything requiring original thought. - Kurt
From: ~kurt on 10 Sep 2009 21:31 Peter Chant <REMpeteOVE(a)petezilla.co.uk> wrote: > > Is it not a good idea to have the OS ask if you want USB sticks mounted in > one click when you plug them in, rather than have root mount them for you? No, I'd rather have it mount when I tell it to mount as a normal user. Just because I stick it into the computer, it doesn't mean I'm ready to use it, or want to have my train of thought interrupted by a stupid popup window asking me stupid questions. Now, maybe the installer could question the user for all sorts of options like this. That would make the installation take a lot longer for many of us though. > > Remember when you had to recomile your kernel to get a sound card to work? I only remember having to tell it to load the module. I do remember having to recompile to get a CDR burnt, though. - Kurt
From: Dan C on 10 Sep 2009 22:06 On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 20:24:52 -0500, ~kurt wrote: > dae3 <7252d9cf(a)example.invalid> wrote: >> ~kurt <actinouranium(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>> I believe pretty much every distro is "From Scratch". >> >> >> Most existing distros are based on some other distro. >> >> > Oh, I see what you are saying.... But they are still built from > scratch. > > I'm not sure if you have given LFS a try - even it has become pretty > much a distro now days. It started off as a document that told you > *how* to go about building your own distro. Now days, it is a step by > step cookbook, and you can even download "packages" that you compile. > When following the current directions, pretty much anyone who gives it a > shot will end up with the same system. What is nice is anyone with > pretty much any experience level can give it a try - and learn as much > as they want out of it. But, someone who *needs* LFS to produce their > own distro probably won't have the ability to do anything requiring > original thought. > > - Kurt A very accurate assessment of LFS. -- "Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me". "Bother!" said Pooh, as he garotted another passing Liberal. Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
From: Kees Theunissen on 10 Sep 2009 23:25
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 23:36:15 +0000, notbob wrote: > On 2009-09-10, Leonard the Committed <leothecomm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> was the obvious lack of auto-this and that which always seemed to >> glitch on the other distro's I've tried. > > Slack is not totally immune. I just used xwmconfig to change from > default kde to fluxbox. What do I get when I invoke startx? twm! What > the...?? Yes, the symlink is xinitrc -> xinitrc.fluxbox, but it goes to > twm. In fact, now matter what wm I choose with xwmconfig, I get twm. > I'm reduced to using startx /etc/X11/xinit/xinitrc.foowm to get the wm I > want. So much for autoconfig. Regardless of all supposed-auto-bloat-ware it's still allowed to RTFM. Did you read the xwmconfig(1) manpage? And while doing so, did you notice: "When run by a non-root user, xwmconfig writes out a $HOME/.xinitrc file, allowing the user to choose their own default window manager (possibly overriding the one chosen as a system default)"? I'm just guessing. I'm still running 12.2 and the above snippet is from my 12.2 manpage. But I'm quite confident that there still is some consistency between releases. This didn't change for a long time and I don't expect this changed with the 13.0 release. Regards, Kees. -- Kees Theunissen. |