sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: "Ivan Lezhnjov Jr." <ivan.lezhnjov.jr AT gmail.com>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Why cmake?
- Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 07:57:00 +0200
Friday 19 December 2008, David Kowis wrote:
> Vlad Glagolev wrote:
> > Another question disturbin me: why do you force devel/rc/testing versions
> > of the spells as they are stable? That's not good, and that's not GNOME
> > (Robin already argued about it).
> >
> > Neither me nor (i hope) the others wanna see their box like 00b00nt00 or
> > something else with a ton of useless binaries/libraries. Nowadays, Source
> > Mage is the only distro where I can keep my system as compact as possible
> > and pretty stable. So don't break my dream. Imho, we should keep it as
> > minimalistic as possible. That's why we use this system.
>
> Actually, our stated goal is to maintain as close to upstream as
> possible, not as minimal as possible. Usually, the two coincide, but not
> always.
Right. I personally don't think SMGL should be a minimalistic distro (well,
it
really depends on what you mean here by minimalistic!). The beauty of SMGL in
my eyes is that you can make it both a minimalistic and bloated box whenever
you want quite easily. I have almost 900 spells. No, I don't have all of the
DEs and window managers installed. Just KDE 3.x and lots of various software.
My interests are diverse and I always end up with lots of things in my life.
I guess you should really clarify what you meant to say for this discussion
to
have any sensible progress.
--
Ivan Lezhnjov Jr.
Europe, Ukraine, Simferopol
Running
Source Mage GNU/Linux, kernel version 2.6.24 build #5
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
Key ID 0x5811D90C
Key Fingerprint 2A52 5C8C 38BE C04F D8DE A169 19E2 E49A 5811 D90C
Use GPG Exercise Your Right To Privacy
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-
[SM-Discuss] Why cmake?,
Vlad Glagolev, 12/18/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Why cmake?, Thomas Orgis, 12/18/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Why cmake?,
David Kowis, 12/18/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Why cmake?, Ivan Lezhnjov Jr., 12/19/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Why cmake?, Remko van der Vossen, 12/19/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Why cmake?, Ladislav Hagara, 12/19/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Why cmake?, lynx, 12/19/2008
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.