Hi, there!

Am 28.05.2010 06:15, schrieb Benedikt Müller:

And who should decide what the best kernel for a desktop is?
Additionally, it'll build over an our, cause it must have so many
drivers and file systems included.


Including a Kernel is IMO a nice thing to get a working installation - quickly.
Well... I would not vote for a "desktop" kernel (including DRI for X and all
these bells and whistles). A simple, fail-safe kernel good for booting the
common filesystems and networking capabilities should be sufficient to get
the first things started after an installation.
Maybe a kernel config similar to the one included with the iso would be
sufficient, maybe some -probe everything- approach is also fine.

But all this is still a question about CRUX philosophy.

IMO CRUX isn't KISS - compiling a kernel for your hardware just isn't KISS
even for the advanced user. I still make some mistakes to suit a (non-modular)
kernel to my hardware if I have to do a config from scratch - even after reading
thousands of code lines during my kernel driver development work in the past.

Or: maybe it's a wise decision to _not_ provide a kernel binary to keep
all the non-professional users away from penetrating the CRUX user base, list
and forum with birdbrained questions (What is Kernel Panic?) and stupid suggestions
(Reinstall... or take some other distro).

Some of you propably avoid the forums of these widespread distros which just
install everywhere with a single click (Windows like) for exactly this reason.

Make your own choice which way you want to travel.
I'm fine with CRUX for simple servers and development, fine with Arch for
Desktop usage.

Greets,

Clemens
_______________________________________________
CRUX mailing list
CRUX@lists.crux.nu
http://lists.crux.nu/mailman/listinfo/crux

Clemens Koller wrote, in part:

Hi, there!


<

But all this is still a question about CRUX philosophy.

IMO CRUX isn't KISS - compiling a kernel for your hardware just isn't KISS
even for the advanced user. I still make some mistakes to suit a
(non-modular)
kernel to my hardware if I have to do a config from scratch - even after
reading
thousands of code lines during my kernel driver development work in the
past.


Or: maybe it's a wise decision to _not_ provide a kernel binary to keep
all the non-professional users away from penetrating the CRUX user base,
list
and forum with birdbrained questions (What is Kernel Panic?) and stupid
suggestions

(Reinstall... or take some other distro).



I would vote against including a kernel binary. Crux is intended for
those who would, sooner or later, encounter a requirement for rebuilding
the kernel for some reason. Thus, the installation-time kernel build is
a reasonable first occurrence.


I came across Crux from a set of requirements *before* I could qualify
as an "advanced user". The current Crux philosophy just worked fine for
easing the learning curve for customized kernel/packages installation:
not too steep, but not too many pitfalls hidden in automated scripts.
Still, going through the learning has been, and will certainly be at
occasions, a painful experience, but I don't see how the Crux
maintainers can really make a difference.


What I hope is that maintainers have a light workload in the medium and
long term so that Crux remains *available* in its current form (i.e. no
project collapse after trying to achieve unrealistic goals).


Thanks, and best regards ...

--
- Thierry Moreau

CONNOTECH Experts-conseils inc.
9130 Place de Montgolfier
Montreal, QC, Canada H2M 2A1

Tel. +1-514-385-5691
_______________________________________________
CRUX mailing list
CRUX@lists.crux.nu
http://lists.crux.nu/mailman/listinfo/crux

On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 07:24:55PM +0200, Clemens Koller wrote:
>
> Make your own choice which way you want to travel.
> I'm fine with CRUX for simple servers and development, fine with Arch for
> Desktop usage.
>
Im fine with crux just as it is. On my servers and desktops/notebooks.

There are loads of distros out there that already does what whats
suggested in this thread. I dont see the point in turning crux into one
of the masses.

--

/Fredrik Rinnestam
_______________________________________________
CRUX mailing list
CRUX@lists.crux.nu
http://lists.crux.nu/mailman/listinfo/crux

On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 02:22:03PM -0400, Thierry Moreau wrote:
>
> What I hope is that maintainers have a light workload in the medium
> and long term so that Crux remains *available* in its current form
> (i.e. no project collapse after trying to achieve unrealistic
> goals).

amen to that brother

--

/Fredrik Rinnestam
_______________________________________________
CRUX mailing list
CRUX@lists.crux.nu
http://lists.crux.nu/mailman/listinfo/crux