"Just some ideas for different future ways to share common aims and efforts...."
Yes indeed, which is precisely what we could do with atm. And as dope as that looks, tbh my immediate thoughts are with having a fresh install. Though I'm sure there must be more of us who have been running Puredyne as our main install and are unsure where to go next, I'm also presuming that there are others who are also thinking that any other ready made OS will seem like a step backwards from what we've had already. If I'd wanted to have a different distro I would have shifted to that already! So the general vibe is with building on debian: which one and how basic can we get to have that custom feel yet contains enough 'stuff' to get going? Obviously going to need a realtime kernel. Are there really decent benefits from rolling your own to fit your own machine? And again if so - how? Personally I would be well chuffed to have a lappy where pretty much everything is compiled and tweeked for my machine. Not sure how big the performance gains would be but personal satisfaction-wise it would be sizeable. And then to be able to clone that as a system restore whilst having learnt how to make custom live-iso's for whatever reason (family, friends, community, work, etc.) would be a really useful skill to share. Onwards eh, Julian On 7 February 2012 23:47, Andy Farnell <padawa...@obiwannabe.co.uk> wrote: > > This side of Debian has always impressed me > > http://live-build.debian.net/cgi-bin/live-build > > Rather than a project that attempts to create and maintain > a one-size-fits-all "distribution" I believe the future > for software that supports groups like this is that > they become a "knowledge base" with a pick-and-mix > set of frequently desired features or configurations > that can move forward independently of the host base > system. This is different from the downstream model > with backporting etc, in that it abandons the attempt to > preserve a definitive version. For 64Studio, Daniel James > and Free Ekanayaka adopted a powerful model based around > PDK (shares some ideas with builders like Broth) > with a concept of different blendable "channels". > > Another advantage is that the base Debian doesnt have > to be downloaded every time and doesnt need to be hosted > by the team, its just a channel (package repo and rules for > blending). Going back to the root of Debian frees the project > from policies and decisions downstream at Ubuntu. > > Just some ideas for different future ways to share > common aims and efforts.... > > > > > On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 06:28:11PM -0500, Dave Britton wrote: > > I've recently been struggling with carrot and coriander's limited > > life support from being karmic-based, so a long-term support > > distribution would be fine with me, I'd vote for Debian or Ubuntu > > just because I know it more and like the packaging system. The most > > important aspect of puredyne for me is the real-time kernel > > implementation, so I may have to just learn how to roll a linux > > distro myself to get the latest RT. I'm working in Supercollider, > > not pd, and I need jack and alsa to work well. I'd be happy to learn > > more about broth, and the intricacies of packaging in general, and > > help where I can. > > > > I also want to go on record thanking Aymeric and the rest of the > > team for bringing a great concept to reality and supporting its > > development for as long and well as you have. puredyne has helped me > > a lot! > > -Dave > > > > On 02/07/2012 09:07 PM, Julian Brooks wrote: > > >>>Erm, now what? > > >>> > > >>>What is the general consensus of where to go next... > > >>> > > >>>I'm guessing that people are thinking of building on top of a minimal > > >>>debian type thing? > > >>+1 for Debian :) > > > > --- > > Puredyne@goto10.org > > http://identi.ca/group/puredyne > > irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne > --- > Puredyne@goto10.org > http://identi.ca/group/puredyne > irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne >
--- Puredyne@goto10.org http://identi.ca/group/puredyne irc://irc.goto10.org/puredyne
