Hi, > 1) Can you even begin to comprehend the amount of work this would be? > You obviously have no idea as to the amount of work involved in [...] > use (for a reason) are often different from Debian. Trying to take a > woody base and apply all of our modifications to it is insane.
It may be, I'm not sure. As I noted in my original message it is a quote "waaaay out there" idea. Question: How many of the patches do you have to reapply through the course of a release anyway, as new versions come out? > 2) Why switch to .deb packages when we will have to switch back to [..] > wants to be LSB-compliant, they will need to support RPM packages. It > would be a waste of time to switch to .deb then back to .rpm. That's an interesting point. I will note however, that Debian *is* LSB compliant in this respect. By installing the alien tool, you also install RPM 4.x, and using alien have the ability to properly install RPM's. > HP seems to be very friendly with Debian. Let them try to make their > own Debian-based distribution. Maybe they'll be the first that > succeeds. Perhaps. Although I that would seem rather odd, based on their recent MandrakeSoft agreement (http://www.ofb.biz/article.php?sid=64). > So your only real issue is with apt-get and dpkg? My God man! You > want us to make a *huge* change in the way things are done simply so > that we can use two tools?!? Doesn't that seem a > little... well... silly? Well, it depends what you consider important. I think the biggest selling point with Debian, right now at least, is that you basically NEVER EVER have to re-install the operating system. I think the idea of not reinstalling even when the glibc changes ought to seem attractive to businesses, don't you (then companies like my web host wouldn't still be using Mandrake 6.x-era glibc's)? Debian's configuration system is also highly convenient and would be very nice under a pretty MDK-ized GUI. :-) > Nice examples. You want to rank "Mandrake Debian" with Corel > (defunct), Progeny (dead), and Stormix (bankrupt)? You gotta > admit... commercial Debian-based distributions have shit for a track > record. I wouldn't want to try down that road. True, but I don't think it's their package management system that killed them to be honest. Of those, only Corel made it to the retail market, and I don't think anyway truly thinks Corel's distro was that great (although notably, it will be returning under the Xandros name in April). > Now, RPM-based distributions seem to be doing quite nicely. Why [...] > Using RPMs. All the guys who decided to use .deb? Non-commercial > (Debian) or dead (Corel/Stormix/Progeny). Yeah, that may sound bad. Although, at least consider this - SuSE was almost bankrupt last year, Caldera is in very poor condition, and I believe there were a few smaller (Stormix-sized) distros using RPM that have vanished from the face of the earth. Oh, and Libranet Debian seems healthy... > (Are you secretly trying to take Mandrake down?) ... (just kidding) Hehehe.. no, definatly not! I like Mandrake too much to take it down (I need to save my "taking down" energy for RH <g>). I also realize my suggestion may be unrealistic, but at the same time if one of the "Big Three" distros untook the change, I'm not so sure it wouldn't popularize the system. -Tim -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy R. Butler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Universal Networks http://www.uninet.info Christian Portal and Search Tool: http://www.faithtree.com Open Source Migration Guide: http://www.ofb.biz ============= "Christian Web Services Since 1996" ==============
