Re: [Devil-linux-develop] Re: Linux Society Meeting / DL Intro -> Fantastic !!

[Heiko Z. <he...@zu...>]

Friedrich Lobenstock wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 21:06, Heiko Zuerker wrote:
> I think we should be LSB compliant, and in the end it should be all
> the same.

I totally agree. All other Distris also try to be LSB conform, so let's 
go for this. I already started implementing this by changing the boot 
scripts.
But we still have a long way in front of us.

>>>They so much love the CD-only solution that I had to show them
>>>your self-imposed bug reporting about harddrive access. They then
>>>suggested we search for a VFAT MSDOS disk as well where we could
>>>set up a DL/LSD file system including swap space. We got a giggle
>>>when the perl install crashed the box for lack of memory.
>>>
>>This will change in the Beta6. Harddisk support (log, swap,
>>samba,...) is running. DL itself doesn't run anymore in a Ramdisk,
>>we switched to SHMFS (uses, if neccessary, swapspace)
> 
> Currently we use 40 MB SHMFS and we have 64 MB as minimum RAM
> requirement.

Did you limit it to 40 MB ?
We should change that in case somebody installs a lot of apps.

>>>Ethernet card detection is very high on the list, for obvious
>>>reasons. Once we get that, then the rest of the distributed
>>>install is a cakewalk.
>>>
>>If you think so. ;-)
>>
> 
>>From a security standpoint I would like the user to specifiy which
> module to load first because otherwise the internal and external
> interface could get swapped.
> 
> But DL for sure could become the standard versatile cdrom distro in
> the future.

I also have sometimes the problem to find out, which of the modules I 
have to use.
We could do it the way, that the user has to start (manually!) a 
program, which configures the system.
We could also think about having something in the boot concept, which 
initially configures a unconfigured system.


-- 

cu
   Heiko

We are Penguin, Resistance is futile!

http://www.devil-linux.org