Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Paul Mahon <dufflebunk AT dufflebunk.homeip.net>]

I don't know... I'd never compiled a program for my first 2 years of
using linux, I still though Bash was like the MSDOS prompt, and I had
almost never used tar.

It has always been my view that we aim for users with linux experience.
Sorcerer was aimed directly at system administrators. I think we don't
require that much experience, but expect some. I agree, a binary distro
is better for people who want to cut their teeth on linux.

On Mon, 2003-12-01 at 10:36, Hamish Greig wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Realistically how much can we expect SMGL users to know ?
> if a person has been a user for 18 months or more is it wrong to expect 
> them 
> to have learned to use basic *nix tools in that time and to be capable of 
> following simple instructions with respect to adding configure switches in 
> BUILD files etc ?
> I had always thought if you didn't want to learn these things you would be 
> better off using redhat or some other binary/preconfigured distro.
> Am I wrong ?
> Is our long term goal to make SMGL completely foolproof for the 
> inexperienced 
> users ? or is a minimum of experience required/expected ?
> 
> Hamish
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iD8DBQE/y2AC8fSufZR6424RArGoAJ9VfS7tNJXBAMJ6c27anM2SKO7owwCffTiH
> ZNF4/QfZzB9jCfhYHaz0Mas=
> =vn7w
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
-- 
De mortuis nihil nisi bonum.

What is that funny looking stuff in the attachment?
http://www.technomom.com/cynthia/pgp/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part