[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: SEUL: What's the diff to SEUL ?
> Debian provides a complete distribution but it is also designed from the
> start to be used as the core of other distributions.
That may be, but how many distribs have to seen based on it? I haven't seen
any. Part of this is because of something someone mentioned a couple days
ago: Currently, if you start from Debian, you get the whole enchilada. If
you strip it down and build what you want on top of it, you lose the benefits
of starting from Debian, namely the compatibility.
What I want to do is *specifically* define such a core. It may be
multi-layered, or semi-modular (i.e. you could exclude the XFree core
components if you just want to build a server distrib), but it will be
*standard*. This allows distributions to form around a Debian base without
The core would be maintained and versioned as a whole, making upgrades for
"child" distributions almost trivial. In the long run, if the most popular
distribs (either todays' or tomorrows') are based on this core, both GPL'd
and commercial projects can release *one* package, and it will work on all
core-compliant Linux distribs. *That* is my goal.
> I do not know if anyone is persuing it at the moment since available
> resources are apparently being aimed at getting Debian-2.0 into a
> releaseable state.
Right. Debian's current highest priority should be (and apparently is)
getting hamm stable and released. No question.
> Qt is the sticking point.
That's why I had to tell a member of the KDE project that SEUL could *not*
use KDE as its environment. Qt just doesn't have a very friendly license.
Erik Walthinsen <firstname.lastname@example.org> - SEUL Project system architect
/ \ SEUL: Simple End-User Linux -
| | M E G A Creating a Linux distribution
_\ /_ for the home or office user