Re: [uml-user] Website is in need of many small changes and updates?

[Balaco B. <bal...@im...>]

On Thu, Oct 29, 2015, at 16:55, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 8:46 PM, Balaco Baco <bal...@im...> wrote:
> >> > > >> > Really!? I wish I had read that somewhere. Well, just retried with
> >> > > >> > another option that is there for me. It is one of the cases I detailed
> >> > > >> > before that end with error.
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> Linux 2.6.24?! SRSLY?
> >> > >
> >> > > If you want me to help, please use a recent/supported kernel.
> >> > > Ready-to-use root filesystems can be found everywhere.
> >> > > For example: http://fs.devloop.org.uk/
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > I'm not sure now, but the two Debian root fs I'm using were downloaded
> >> > from the site you point here. Later I'll check their sums, and PS this
> >> > in a next message. Kernels 2.6.* were recent and assumed to be supported
> >> > in most places I could need - or so I assumed.
> >>
> >> > What is your definition of recent and your definition of supported? This
> >> > may be useful for many other users of UML I guess. The fact that the
> >> > kernels offered in the UML website didn't work, and then I tried to
> >> > compile from source should be pointed here. I don't think I have done
> >> > something so weird or uncommon here - mainly because I don't need much
> >> > as long as I have flexibility to execute it.
> >>
> >> Everything that gets -stable updates.
> >
> > Website: UML's, http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/, accessed right
> > now.
> >
> > "Getting started" seemed like a good place for me a few weeks ago (and
> > still does, but...). And I think it will make many users feel and think
> > the same way I did. Except that it gives us wrong directions - but gives
> > bad directions for users that will surely follow them without knowing
> > the wrong details since they're expecting to see something working to
> > get more familiar with UML. "Download THIS ( pointing to
> > http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/linux-2.6.24-rc7.bz2) or THIS
> > (pointing to
> > http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/linux-2.6.24-x86_64.bz2 )". Are
> > these kernel versions familiar to you in the list? They are for me, now
> > I just understood a few more details, and the possible path to solution,
> > to execution without unexpected problems - or so I hope.
> >
> > The thread I started today, quickly skimmed in the above quotes, shows
> > this. The website needs to be fixed. And more than that, needs to be
> > updated more frequently (or so I must guess) or write about how users
> > can be sure their setup is good enough.
> >
> > I downloaded both suggested kernels, following the official (and assumed
> > best, for that) instructions. Both did not work (and still don't). And
> > the one that worked back then is probably needing something I've
> > forgotten in these days or stopped to work today. But that one I
> > compiled from source - and now I need to do it again, from the very
> > start.
> >
> > Everything that gets stable updates... but this should not exclude the
> > UML website, right?
> 
> The website is very old and from the pre-mainline time.
> If you volunteer to update and maintain it it would be wonderful.
> 
> I'm not a web designer nor do I have the time for this.
> 

Really?! I would never bet that it was that old.

I can update it. And I also have a little bit of web design knowledge
and practices that may be eventually useful. On the other hand, I would
need directions and thumbs up to guarantee that the contents are kept
correct (which would be my main objetive when changing texts). I have
not programmed that much kernel code and "related or almost so" things,
although I have a solid C background - and this is something that UML
seems to have a broad contact surface, from the messages I have read
here.

At most a month of medium site changes are good as expectations?
Although most of the time I can give a few hours per week, so that month
should not look too bad.

What would be the process? If only with you directly, I guess we
continue to talk about it between us.


-- 
http://www.fastmail.com - mmm... Fastmail...