A friend of me is writing a pkgsystem that builds everything inside a chroot and allows to create a full usable distribution, the pkgsystem itself is not yet finished, but is pretty fast , written in C and shellscript and I really think it is a good project. But actually it is a single-man project. We can use this project as a tool to build the base system.

http://repo.or.cz/w/xbps.git/

Actually i'm happy with arch linux, but, i really miss a non-gnu linux and minimalistic distribution. We should get a look on alternatives for glibc (google one? uclibc? ..) but maybe the biggest rock we will face it will be the X server...this is probably one of the interesting projects to work on, but without keeping the X compatibility. (just as an emulation layer) X11 is bloat. (as we have already discussed, we can reuse the drivers of xorg) but designing a better and simpler API. But this is probably a long topic to talk about, and we're of course not the first ones to claim for an X11 replacement.

--pancake

Benjamin Conner wrote:
> What do you think about creating an offtopic mailing list in suckless for
> discussing such
> kind of topics, instead of using the dwm@ one like nowadays happen.
I agree with Anselm.  I like a lot of your ideas in that message.
"I really miss the conceptual experimentation that dwm was in the past. But I agree that we should probably focus on other topics like 'st' or a full OS based on minimalist software
(based on Linux without GNU craps) ...
"
That's a good idea. Maybe do an lfs. I'd use wmii as the Wm, so you don't have to recompile. Or maybe have no WM and just X so that you can put one in yourself and customize it. IDK. On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Leandro Chescotta <lchesco...@banelco.com.ar <mailto:lchesco...@banelco.com.ar>> wrote:

    2009/5/15 Anselm R Garbe < garb...@gmail.com
    <mailto:garb...@gmail.com> >:

    > I'll provide a new multiscreen support this weekend in dwm. It's
    based on assigning specific tags to specific screens.

    I really like the idea


    La informaciĆ³n del presente documento es clasificada como
    Confidencial.



Reply via email to