[RULE] Reflections on a Debianized RULE (or RULE'ized Debian?)

[M. Fioretti]

On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 11:34:03 at 11:34:03AM -0500, James Miller (office) (jamtat at mailsnare.net) wrote:

> I'm totally the wrong guy for this,

Not at all, you made a good summary, and a lot of sensible comments.
I'd just suggest that a blank line every 4/5 sentences would make text
easier tp read (again, not a critique to the concepts, good indeed,
just a suggestion for presentation).

Comments on specific points (liberally trimmed for brevity) follow
inline
 
> My first observation is that Debian probably doesn't need to be RULE'ized

Absolutely correct, installer-wise. Ditto for your other comments on
Debian installer
 
> a sort of unspoken assumption ... is that such a project should
> serve the needs and interests of the economically disadvantaged - a
> real laudable goal, in my view (and also one with some environmental
> advantages, to boot).

Correct, but not complete: RULE as a project (permanent website,
making it easier to people with simple desktop needs and no prior
IT/Linux skills...) is meant to do just that, and it is more than
enough to justify the effort. Other very good reasons to go RULE even
when one has money and skills are:

       a trimmed-to-death server is safer and less a burden to
       maintain by definition

       personally, I am lucky enough to found 2000+ spare bucks
       (almost) every other year: still, I can think of 2000+ better
       ways to spend them (vacation, instruction, books, theather...)
       and want to make easier doing that to people

> Imagine what sort of time an impoverished, and presumably less
> computer-literate, individual is going to have with a standard
> Debian install

Correct, however a basic Debian problem, even for those with enough
money for new HW.

> ...the Debian project link that was provided in an earlier post
> ... offerred some automated install routine ... [which] only works
> as a network install, however.

I haven't read that link yet, but remember that the project is based
on FAI, Debian equivalent of Red Hat Kickstart: both are meant to
speed up many equal installs, not to make the initial setup easier.

Yes, network availability is another reason why that projects and
things like the Linux terminal server stuff for schools (forgot the
link..) still leave a lot of need for RULE solutions, which give a
stand-alone PC from the start.
 
> RH's install routine is more memory intensive *precisely
> because* of an attempt to ease installation.  True?

Probably not. Saying that Red Hat is a company and focuses on the HW
that paying users are likely to have would be closer to the mark (and
not a critique to Red Hat, of course)

> I suppose people involved in the ease-of-installation aspect of a
> RULE-ized Debian

Ease of installation and memory requirements are partly independent.
This is demonstrated by Debian difficulty of use. If one has a good
automatic hardware detection system and a decent set of character
based menus in his native language the install is much easier than it
seems.

> The network install capability of Debian - one of its more appealing
> aspects to the financially advantaged (comparatively) and tech-literate -

Red Hat has it too. Ditto for the RULE installer.

> Some ways in which a RULE-ized Debian could benefit from current RULE work
> is in the area of programs. 

Both Red Hat and Debian can be installed/updated from CD or from
network. Your assertion above hits the most important point, however,
as well as this:

> one thing a RULE-ized Debian could use and which already exists for
> RH RULE is a listing of programs that work well on older hardware.

I disagree on this, instead:

> This is the point on which a RULE-ized Debian and the current RH
> based RULE are fully on a par

The low resources programs may be found on both sets of CDs. The
problem is if one doesn't know in advance which they are he will spend
weeks reading the package descriptions and configuring everything by
hand. RULE wants to get to the point where one selects "basic desktop"
and:

* finds all and only those programs in the menus and on disk.
* they are configured to work together (ie mutt opens word attachments
  in abiword, opens e-links on URLs, etc... without prior manual
  fiddling)

Last time I checked Debian was not really up to this task.

I repeat that you are right on the main point: regardless of the
distro, we could and should partner to list the most efficient
programs, *and* the compilation options to make them even lighter:
once that is written down, packaging them as .deb or .rpm is almost
trivial.

Ciao,
	Marco Fioretti

-- 
Marco Fioretti                 m.fioretti, at the server inwind.it
Red Hat for low memory         http://www.rule-project.org/en/

Reality is an illusion - perception is what counts.


_______________________________________________
Rule Project HOME PAGE:  http://www.rule-project.org/en/
Rule Development Site:   http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/rule/
Rule-list at nongnu.org
http://mail.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/rule-list