ken at kenmoffat.uklinux.net
Thu Jul 15 06:26:14 PDT 2004
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004, Matthias B. wrote:
> If we had 2 branches, one with a clear focus towards maximum functionality
> and progress and one with a clear focus towards education, then we would
> not be having this conflict. The functionality branch would comprise
> unstable and testing, oriented towards progress and new development,
> accepting complexities such as udev, hotplug and other useful stuff. The
> goal would be to give people instructions for building their own Linux
> distro that can compete with other distros. Educational content would be
> secondary and targeted at advanced users who want to understand what
> they're doing, what's the rationale behind the instructions but don't need
> textbook style education.
> The educational branch on the other hand would be what is stable now, but
> stripped down even further (e.g. no networking, possibly not even
> SysVinit), with no need to produce a useful, complete system with
> up-to-date packages. The educational branch would deal with udev, hotplug,
> networking, sophisticated SysVinit setups,... in Appendixes that are
> something like educationally enhanced super-hints. It would be like a
> course with several modules. The basic module would tell you how a Linux
> system works at a simple example that leaves out all the complex stuff.
> Additional modules build on this.
Now you're getting me worried :) I don't fit into _either_ of these
branches. I'm a functional educationalist, who doesn't like to bleed in
more than one area at a time!
Examples - at the moment I'm still trying to build a better desktop on
an early belfs base - there are known problems with the base, but my
desktop issues are down to BLFS runtime dependency and build-order
issues. I can't take the pain of rebuilding the base system there until
I've worked out my best _compromise_ for the desktop.
Also, I'm trying to port the 2.6 kernel to my ppc's platform (the 2.4
minimum base work was already done). Yes, I can see all the wonders of
sysfs, udev, etc and hopefully I'll be playing with them one day, but
for the moment I need a _stable_ environment there so I can concentrate
on the kernel errors. But, stable has to mean maximum functionality.
The tendency on lfs-dev is to regard everything as black and white.
That's a fine position for Linus to take in keeping the kernel doing the
right thing. It's a much less appropriate view in many other places.
Oh, and if we had the educational | functional split, the functional
branch would still be having many of the arguments we've seen recently.
das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce
More information about the lfs-dev