[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/slitaz Archives
]
- To: slitaz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: truce
- From: Indigo <pointofavailability@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 13:38:17 -0700
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=66TXjzlLT/X8UDiqvkm8m/DGFUXl4nvGUMyqmfDZd6E=; b=JRwnP15v0abmKsZVE3RmEKVdnTAQjvRbrJvygriqN5nNlWnjfhj2T7ZOxznf6IZMEr yX5awFBAI/kiUsYkeEHSwffdpq+U+OiJicUiaKDE6Wn/f2/7UkCvkYFez5uOwGhdGzpn RUtQZBeDMmYuuPn5TZqniV0HzVSfiUbu07BBE=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=GJguDR6MLZsTVbw0K1+yDyTc7SklvJ+j5j4w69nOee/rl6sa9ryayKW5a7aJopGapp R+eDJAwSy3K089mJHdoOJNCllcsInQ0wb7rsMLDT4WF8EhVEMBvmAmhKPRyRQAqLTZTO lCNcW2yk+ruHHgjLPh//fJV9fkps012E07RRQ=
Another point -- before the new tazwok, there were a lot of dependency
problems if one started with the base.iso or justX. Things worked
better if one started with the core.iso, installed, and then
modified... but a common complaint I've heard on IRC is that a user
makes changes, adds packages, and so forth -- but the changes aren't
kept when installing.
As for the whole debate about cookutils and tazwok, I think everyone
has made valid points -- and I'm still keeping out of it -- but I do
agree with the focus on simplicity. It's one of the things that makes
Slitaz so appealing. If it takes a software engineer to use a tool,
why have it? But, I will offer this thought: Since one of the
greatest things about Slitaz is easy-to-use graphical interfaces,
perhaps we could benefit from a "receipt-generator", something to
simplify the use of the new tazwok (it is stable, just not so easy to
use). And at that, I'm going back to being a spectator.
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Eric Joseph-Alexandre <erjo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Le Fri, 6 May 2011 21:57:13 +0200,
> Christophe Lincoln <pankso@xxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
>
>
>>
>> > +1
>>
>> Eric are you sure you want that ? I remmber the first thing who lost
>> you with new Tazwok was the fact we have a sandbox mounted and a
>> chroot mounted with bind so after one dont realy know where are
>> files. And if I remmenber well, we even did a rm -rf who breaked and
>> removed a lot of stuff.
>
> I was lost because tazwok seems to chroot in chroot and build in
> sandbox. And /home is mounted on the $CHROOT/home.
>
> Now i have only on chroot (tazdev chroot).
> And src,packages,wok are separately are mounted in the chroot not /home
> So i can share src and wok with many chroots (3.0, cooking) and if i rm -rf i dont loose my /home.
>
>>
>> - Christophe
>
> +Eric.
>>
>> ---
>> SliTaz GNU/Linux Mailing list - http://www.slitaz.org/
>>
>
>
>
> ---
> SliTaz GNU/Linux Mailing list - http://www.slitaz.org/
>
>
---
SliTaz GNU/Linux Mailing list - http://www.slitaz.org/