Re: [Mentalunix-developers] More requirements:

[CoolProgrammer <coo...@ya...>]

Ok--I'm lost in this... it seems almost like I've
missed something.

Also, software does not have to be compiled on the
machine on which it is to be used--I think SuSE is
proving that to me right now (just installed it--it's
kicking ass compared to what I had on here, and it's
driving our 486 really well).

I'll leave the rest of the message alone for now--I
have some massive Linux configuration to do and a
CD-RW drive to install in Windows...

~CoolProgrammer


--- Alan Grimes <ala...@st...> wrote:
> Clinton Ebadi wrote:
> 
> yer clueless...
> I'm sorry to get personal but only on rare occasions
> do I see such an
> amazingly spectacular display of unthinking blind
> ignorance! 
> 
> Unfortunately all linux developers are as stupid as
> you are. =(
> 
> 
> 
> > > P - No binary distributions! Argument: When I
> installed Mandrake 6.5
> > > my Athalon had a BogoMips rating of 799. When I
> recompiled the kernel
> > > it jumped to 1,500. =) Therefore all software
> should be compiled by
> > > and for the host processor.
> > >
> > If you read the mpkg spec,
> 
> I have never heard of mpkg. I would have no inkling
> that such a thing
> existed for me to look for. 'mpkg' is hakish anyway.
> 
> 
> > The time involved would not be very nice, not to
> > mention some things like ACE or CORBA that require
> HUGE amounts of
> > ram to compile(500+ MB)
> 
> Dear God!  = 0
> 
> > distribution ISOs would be in binary form(i386,
> i486, i586, i686,
> 
> Well I guess we're stuck with a precompiled version
> for every chip ever
> made... =( 
> The project will need a massive compile farm but it
> will be the fastest
> out-of-the-box distribution on the planet... 
> 
> > This is where the newbie manpages come in.
> 
> I have never heard of "newbie" manpages. I wouldn't
> know how to look for
> them and only vague notions of how to access them,
> assuming man was
> functioning properly on whatever system I had. Linux
> has nothing
> remotely akin to anything as helpful as "this end
> up".
> 
> > It's all going to be linked up to linuxnewbie(I'll
> talk to sensei when 
> > we get ready to start it) database.
> 
> That might be helpful...
> 
> > We might as well add a whole newbie system in with
> it..make a new 
> > shell based on bash that has newbie command
> aliases?
> 
> That would be pretty perverse... Simply provide
> commands with english
> names and simple intuitive interfaces. Send
> everything that is not easy
> and *USABLE* to /device/null, where it belongs.
> 
> > Let me explain. You type memory. It loads mem.
> Well, if we just aliased 
> > it, you would have a huge list of aliases,
> 
> Well on my system I have several aliases for mem,
> each with its own
> switch settings... I only use the one called
> "memory" though... 
> I just checked my "res" directory and I see that I
> havn't touched any of
> aliases since AUGUST OF 1996!!!!
> 
> DOS has provided a system that is so stable that I
> have files that have
> been preserved perfectly for half a decade. There
> are files on my system
> with date stamps of 1986.
> 
> > and you would think memory was the actual command.
> 
> It would be.... And life would be *good*. I would
> actually use such an
> operating system. =\
> 
> >  So, with a special 
> > file..maybe .newbierc with the alias in it. Here
> could be a sample 
> > session:
> > 
> > user@host:~$ memory
> > user, the actual command is mem.
> > type: nman mem for help
> > user@host:~$ mem
> > You have xxxx MB of free ram....
> 
> That is disgusting. 
> 
> > The user could learn easily that way, and the
> commands would be more
> > intuitive.
> 
> Huh, I explained 'intuitive' in my last post, you
> didn't listen.
> 
> > And, the user doesn't become dependent on the
> shortcuts..after learning 
> > the command, they are a competent gnu/linux user.
> 
> Thinking like that infurriates me to the point where
> I want to pick up a
> brick and bash it into your skull. 
> 
> THE POINT IS NOT TO MAKE THE USER A COMPETENT
> 'GNU/LINUX USER', YOU
> STUPID SACK OF SHIT, IT IS TO MAKE A GNU/LINUX THAT
> DOES NOT REQUIRE
> 'COMPETANCE'. A COLLEGE GRADUATE WITH A DEGREE IN
> LIBERAL ARTS FROM 1980
> SHOULD KNOW EVERYTHING HE NEEDS TO USE A COMPUTER
> WITHOUT *ANY*
> TRAINING. THE WORLD SHOULD NOT HAVE TO BEND TO THE
> WHIMS OF THE POMPUS
> ASSHOLES THAT MADE UNIX!!! 
> 
> If you kick me from the list for that I will be
> content. Please notify
> me if you do. -- thanx. 
>  
> > and stuff like that. The app is centralized(by
> package name). So, you
> > can just cd into the apps dir, and then the
> appname, and see all of
> > the file associated with it. Of course, the dir
> would be read-only,
> > and could be reconstructed if root trashed it by
> running some rebuild
> > command in mpkg.
> 
> =\
> I don't get it...
> I'm a DOS user. 
> cd gamez 
> cd quake
> quake
> or 
> deltree quake.
> or 
> cd quake 
> cd id 
> e quake.ini 
> or 
> cd quake
> md newlevel
> cd newlevel 
> pkunzip \archive\newqkake . /d 
> or .... 
> 
> Do I have the only sane computer on the planet?
> 
> > No app planned, but it is an interesting idea.
> Maybe a program like
> > newbie xinit? A newbie init front end in Gtk that
> had options like
> > this(to change runlevels):
> 
> Anything that is easy to use... I don't understand
> this shit anyway so
> I'm indifferent...
> 
> [switching to single user mode] 
> 
> Multiuser mode is totally pointless on workstations.
> I would remove all traces of multiuser from the base
> system and then
> re-implement it in user-space and then provide it as
> an option.
> 
> Unix is perverse so you'd have to re-implement
> almost everything... 
> 
> > I think it would make a good program. I could
> sketch it out in
> > glade(just the GUI, not code) later.
> 
> GUI is like a US golden dollar. It costs a buck,
> Looks like its worth a
> lot more but in truth its WORTHLESS!!! =\ 
> 
> The OS that is fundamentally easier to use is the
> real gold that I am
> seeking...
> 
> [console managment] 
> > Really hard to do that. Programs like Xemacs on
> the console change
> > the cursor for internal management. Please explain
> further what you
> > mean exactly.
> 
> If the OS doesn't do that then it is not even a
> complete OS, and not
> worth much to anyone at all. =(
> 
> 
> > On 27 Dec 2000, at 15:20, Alan Grimes wrote:
>  
> [multiple editors and other redundancy]
> > ? I am confused. Users need choice. The base
> system will either have
> > nano or mcedit, to avoid the emacs / vi war. Then,
> vi and emacs will
> > both be optional packages.
> 
> Ofcourse you can install E-macs later but I will not
> help in that untill
> it is rewritten... E-macs is probably one of the
> most advanced
> applications around... Its a pitty that its so
> difficult to use.
> 
> > A distribution is more than just the OS.
> 
> Is != should be. 
> should be, um, see DOS. ;)
> 
> > It is the suite of programs that make the OS(which
> is GNU + linux in 
> > our case) useful.
> 
> Yes, But that is not what we are working on here.
> We make the system through which the computer can be
> applied to useful
> work. BUT NOT THE APPLICATIONS THEMSELVES... =\ 
> 
> > Programs like X will be optional. Like in most
> distributions. Of 
> > course, our install won't be very newbie friendly
> until I can do some > decent X programming.
> 
> THAT IS TOTALLY BASS ACKWARDS!!!!
> THE SYSTEM BECOMES USABLE *THEN* YOU CUSTOMIZE YOUR
> USER INTERFACE. 
> DON'T ANY OF YOU DIPSHITS GET IT? STUPID GUI OPTIONS
> IN WINDOWS 98'S
> REGEDIT DO NOT MAKE THE REGISTRY ONE WIT EASIER TO
> USE!!! DO YOU GET IT?
> NOT ONE WIT!!!! 
> X XWINDOWS, "ENLIGHTENMENT" "MOTIF" "OLWM" WHATEVER
> I DON'T CARE!!!
> THEY ARE ALL PERFECTLY FUCKING WORTHLESS. I WOULDN'T
> PAY HALF A CENT FOR
> THEM, NOT EVEN THAT... INFACT I WOULD PAY YOU TO
> REFORMAT AND INSTALL
> BeOS, WHICH TAKES CARE OF ITSELF REASONABLY WELL.
> WHEN WILL YOU
> FUCKFACES LEARN???? 
> 
> YOU HAVN'T LEARNED A SINGLE FUCKING THING IN THE
> LAST TWENTY-THREE YEARS
> ABOUT WHAT AN OS IS, WHAT IT SHOULD BE, OR HOW TO
> MAKE IT EASIER TO
> USE!!! 
> 
> -- 
> If a "bug" in one program causes another to fail,
> the OS is at fault.
> http://users.erols.com/alangrimes/  <my website.
> 
> Unsolicited "spam" messages to this account are
> subject to usage fees
> and
> in cases of fraud or egregeous abuse, prosecution.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mentalunix-developers mailing list
> Men...@li...
>
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/mentalunix-developers


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online!
http://photos.yahoo.com/