Baslinux mailing list

[3aoo-cvfd AT dea.spamcon.org]

cce.zizkov AT volny.cz wrote:
>
> They reached some limitations of busybox replacements 
> (eg. missing options while compiling programs)

There are many limitations in BL3.  It is mini-Linux.
It does not provide the range of options of a maxi-Linux.

> and were not skilled enough to replace the commands 
> from Slackware.

If they are not skilled enough to replace the commands
from Slackware, then they aren't skilled enough to run
a compiler on BasicLinux.

> It should be made clear in the first instructions what 
> busybox is, 

Why stop there?  Shouldn't I be making clear in the first
instructions that BL3 is missing most of the common fonts,
that the BL3 version of rxvt lacks many options, that the 
BL3 version of swm lacks many options, that BL3 is missing 
several important X libraries, that BL3 has no curses 
capability, that BL3 has no login and no non-root users, 
and on and on and on.  There are a zillon things missing 
in BL3.  I would need several pages to list them all.

> and there should be an add-on that entirely replaces 
> busybox 

You are very welcome to create such an add-on and I will
consider adding it to the collection.

> BL3 that is not intended to be installed on HD partition

People are welcome to put it on a HD partition (and boot
it with lilo if they want).  However, BL3 is non-volatile
and it already includes most of the things in the BL1 HD
installation (and more!).  So there is probably no urgent 
need to install it to HD.

> I would expect that this feature will not limit users 
> in organizing their hard disk directory tree. Already
> C:\SLAKWARE to install BL2 was quite annoying in this 
> regard. 

Quite annoying?  Why?  It is only a temporary directory,
used solely for the initial HD installation.  Ten minutes 
later, you can deltree it.  Why would that annoy people?

> Please do not trash BL 1.x! 

I don't have the space to keep a full set of BL1 stuff.
I intend to delete it soon.  So, anybody who thinks it
is valuable should make their own copy.

> I have only seen one working Linux system with full Czech 
> localization, and that is BL 1.

That's interesting.  You mean KDE and/or Gnome can't do 
full Czech localization?  

> On any of the five computers in my office and at home 
> there are at least 3 versions of BL (BL1, BL1-Slackware-3.5, 
> BL2, BL2-Slackware- 7.1). 

BL3 is library-compatible with BL1 and kernel-compatible
with BL2, so it shouldn't be too strange.

> As the hardware on these machines is quite different 
> (from 386 to Pentium II, 

If you are running an Xterminal on that 386 (or would like to), 
you will probably find BL3 worthwhile.  One of the main goals
of BL3 is to enable old PCs to be used as Xterminals.

Cheers,
Steven