Re: Next Cooking or RC - Few questions

[Indigo <pointofavailability@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Brenton Edgar Scott
<trixarian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hmmm, comparing compressed packages sizes (which can be comparable to
> iso compressed space used), you get the following:
> nano = 85kb
> leafpad = 34kb
> beaver = 69kb
> vi = none if busybox version is used

Thank you for checking - I just made a guess based on the download
size of e3 vs nano sources and adjusted a bit for lzma vs gzip... and
I guess I was way off.

As for bloat and overall size, as long as we want to include the
features already present in Slitaz, there's simply going to be a limit
to how small it can be.  Projects like TinyCore sacrifice some of the
things which make Slitaz so desirable.  Poly-p-ux goes further by
using a homemade init/rc system
(http://www.polypux.org/projects/snailit/) and also a 2.0 kernel (for
size and usability on ancient machines) - aside from adopting uclibc,
or replacing all of the scripts with compiled binaries, I suspect
Slitaz is about as small as it will get -- it's only gone over the
30MB mark by a little, and a big part of that is from taz*
improvements and updated packages.

Whatever the case, the KISS philosophy should be as much about
usability as it is development.  I'm one of the many users who wants a
small, lightweight distro that works OOTB and has the basic features
Slitaz already includes.

---
SliTaz GNU/Linux Mailing list - http://www.slitaz.org/