Very Computer

Is there a rationale behind this project?

Are there reasons not to use an existing distribution, e.g. Debian?

Is'nt it wiser to concentrate on the Kde itselve?

--
Sietse's signature file.

Quote:> ...

What would be cool would be a super thin Linux/kde setup.
ie: simplified kernel, Off switch robust file system "see jfs", no root
user or groups and simplified file permissions to console/network
read/write. wrt this, no obvious security holes like ftp and sendmail
deamons running, no inetd. Maybe the option to run a hypertext deamon.
Basically a real switch on/off client workstation. Even better: entirely
network installable apart from a boot floppy.
That would really be something to aim for and could seriously shaft
personal OS vendors. ;->
Anyone interested?
ps: home address is james aT-thingy melloworldSPAM! SPAM! MORE SPAM!
dot-thingy com
regards,
James.
--
4920616d206e6f742061206e756d62657221

On Wed, 03 Dec 1997 17:58:12 +0000, James O Flynn

But how much of this has anything to do with KDE?

The notion of having a "KDE-based" distribution strikes me as being
rather silly.  A "simpler kernel" is neither cause nor effect of a
"better KDE." Ditto for LFS/JFS.  Plugging security holes isn't usefully
a KDE issue. And a new, less powerful, permission system is quite
orthogonal to whether a distribution uses KDE or not.

The more appropriate thing to do is to create a set of RPM or DEB
packages that build up a decent KDE installation atop an existing Linux
distribution.

It seems to me that the *real* reason for a KDE distribution is most
likely that the KDE group have been rebuffed for their choice of the Qt
libraries by the two most popular distributions, namely the folks that
"manage" the Debian and Red Hat distributions.

hogonal to whether a distribution uses KDE or not.

Quote:

> The more appropriate thing to do is to create a set of RPM or DEB
> packages that build up a decent KDE installation atop an existing Linux
> distribution.

> It seems to me that the *real* reason for a KDE distribution is most
> likely that the KDE group have been rebuffed for their choice of the Qt
> libraries by the two most popular distributions, namely the folks that
> "manage" the Debian and Red Hat distributions.

My company will be releasing a distribution based upon
RedHat 5.0 which will have the rpm's for QT 1.3.1 and
KDE-Beta-2.1 on the CD. I am also considering putting
linuxconf on there but the enhanced sys admin tools may be
sufficient for me not to do this.

I am working on the compilation now so if anyone
specifically wants something put in email me and I will
consider it.

Jason Clifford
Genesis Linux Systems (UK)
--
 --- Please note that my return email address is

As a service I am offering a public list of domains which
send junk email
and the networks which support junk email sending. You may
use this list as
the basis of your smtp SPAM block. To be included in the
list simply send me
a junk email - note that by doing so you enter into a
contract for the
provision of the service under which I must include you in
the list.

quite right. That's why I said "what would be cool". The idea of a new
distribution is unecessary, I like kde as a desktop and an existing
distrib with a kde setup would be nice, more over as an effective PC OS
for the ordinary user, something based around linux/kde, but without a
full weight unix system, as this would be unecessary, would be quite
cool. It would be effectively be a freely available OS/2 / Windows/Mac
replacement the average user could cope with and like.
Linux is a Unix/NT/VMS replacement more than a Windows replacement. It
is a little overwhelming to the non-technical. I think that with a
"nifty" interface, ie kde, there might be an niche for a free
single-user personal OS. I also feel, maybe for subversive reasons, that
we should make it our duty to make such a thing available to people.
Regards,
James.
--
4920616d206e6f742061206e756d62657221

On Thu, 04 Dec 1997 17:59:53 +0000, James O Flynn

Fair enough.

If there were to be a better configuration system to surround X that
would make it on the whole easier to work with, that would indeed be
"extremely cool."

Again, KDE is orthogonal to that.

Major X problems include:
a) So which defaults are coming from where?
b) Where *are* those xauth settings being set?
c) And what's making it pick *this* resolution?

These *aren't* resolved by anything I see in KDE.

Quote:>Linux is a Unix/NT/VMS replacement more than a Windows replacement. It
>is a little overwhelming to the non-technical. I think that with a
>"nifty" interface, ie kde, there might be an niche for a free
>single-user personal OS. I also feel, maybe for subversive reasons, that
>we should make it our duty to make such a thing available to people.

KDE may be useful once X is up and running, but the things that make X
hard to configure aren't resolved by any of the things I see KDE doing.

The "nifty" interface may come as KDE develops; I suspect that things
like Caldera's "COAS" may prove more crucial.
--

Windows95, Word97, Excel95: With all the criticisms of Microsoft, at
least they provide "best-before" dating on many of their products...

I don't understand which of those things RedHat doesn't do.  The only
one that I'm not certain that RedHat does will is
"Internationalization".

Good luck!

--

+1-615-343-1720 (office)               +1-615-460-9299 (home)
http://relax.ltc.vanderbilt.edu/~pfaffman/

Hello,
Please make sure you send the subscribe message to


rest of the instrictions are ok :)

Thanks,
-Daniel Mills

(http://www.kde.org).

Quote:>PLEASE remember a short description of the software and the LOCATION.
>This group is archived at http://www.iki.fi/liw/linux/cola.html

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: 2.6.3ia
>Charset: latin1

>iQCVAgUBNIUi5lrUI/eHXJZ5AQE3OgP/XWaEjCKz1fs+zGifiksEq2MZ43433CAW
>HVDtENNoWLUz0QiDF9ySDwObVnYe5NMpFpyFdnZkcZdF/3Y6we50XAUvpIcLHJoZ
>whcXf6CXwpROe0CH+tPl0bprx5ZspXDkOGfwYOGkDQp5MkTkd3I6YDUP4uKJ1sF6
>BQjTUhG/ohY=
>=4UAi
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

(http://www.veryComputer.com/).

Quote:> > At the moment, there is nothing. We need all the help you could give
us.
> > We have thinked this at the moment:
> > - - As powerful as other Linux distribution.
> > - - Easy installion (for this who know nothing about computers too),
> > easy use
> > and easy configuration.
> > - - Internationalization of all the system.
> > - - All the programs which we can collect.
> > - - An easy to use program to install and unistall the programs.
> > - - All the system configuration have to be done on Kde.
> > Anything more?
> > What do you think?

> I don't understand which of those things RedHat doesn't do.  The only
> one that I'm not certain that RedHat does will is
> "Internationalization".

5.0 ships which glibc, which can do internationalization.

--
Frank Sweetser rasmusin at wpi.edu fsweetser at blee.net | PGP key available
paramount.res.wpi.net RedHat 5.0  Linux 2.0.33p1  i586   | at public servers
Sam:   What's up, Norm?
Norm:  My *s.  It's freezing out there.
                -- Cheers, Coach Returns to Action