Scott C. Best wrote:
> George:
>
> Sorry for the late reply...
>
>> Time to do some good old-fashioned "market classification" here. We have
>> two base-level types of people using LRP:
>>
>> 1. People who want to have a firewall/router that will let them share IP
>> addresses and don't want to spend the money on a commercially available
>> one.
>>
>> 2. People who want to tinker, and as such have a fair bit of knowledge.
>
>
>
> I more or less agree with your generalization. I think
> Eigerstein proves your point substantially. Recall LRP without
> it, back when modmaker was alive? Every newcomer was pushed
> in the tinker category. From my pov, Eigerstein was the "eighty
> percent" solution, and has been a great success both on its own
> and for the project in general.
>
>> The problem then becomes where we draw the line between the two.
>
>
> Perhaps a way to think about it is from the point of view
> of the newcomer.
I think we really should.
> That is, we'd answer the question: "why would a
> new user use this LEAF stuff". So, similar to what Eigerstein
> did, we could break it out by high level description:
>
> * Using a Cable-modem with a DHCP? Download MapleLEAF 1.0
>
> * Using a DSL-modem with PPPoE? Download FigLEAF 1.3
>
> * Using a dial-up modem? Start here with RedLEAF 1.1
>
> * Experts only: want everything? MallornLEAF is for you.
>
> That sort of thing. Or if MapleLEAF was tied to a
> specific kernel/glibc version, we could post pre-rolled
> images like "MapleLEAF for DSL", "MapleLEAF for Developers",
> etc.
Excellent idea! If we don't most windows users are IMHO more likely to
buy another harddisk and put Win98SE on it and use it's Internet
Connection Sharing. So we really should make it as easy as possible for
them.
>
>> Any thoughts or ideas? I'm thinking that trimming the fat off of this
>> stuff, combined with UPX, might be enough for us to go glibc 2.1.x or
>> even 2.2.x for base router images.
>
UPX probably will save very little space, if any, on the bootdisk if you
use it for binaries as the lrp packages are already gzip compressed.
>> At least then, it would be easier to
>> transition from the basics to the fun stuff.
>
Agreed.
Ewald Wasscher
_______________________________________________
Leaf-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
