On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 12:56:51 +0200 "Hemmann, Volker Armin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Samstag, 7. Juli 2007, Thufir wrote: > > On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 10:47:24 -0700, kashani wrote: > > > I say bring on the easiness. Make a big fat button after > > > the > > > > liveCD > > > > > loads that says "Just install it for me in a nice default kinda > > > way so I can start playing with this whole USE flag thing I've > > > heard so much about" and be done with it. > > > > The irony here is that gentoo has had the live cd for a long time > > which makes installing so much easier, but just won't go that extra > > step because...it's supposed to be hard? If it's "supposed" to be > > hard, why have the live cd? seems contrary. > > > > well, hard filters out the 'I am stupid and I don't read > documentation' crowd, which is a good thing. I would not call the > installation via graphical installer 'hard', I would call it 'buggy > beyond usefullness'. > > Apart from that, IMHO a livecd is completly braindead. When compiling > you need as much free ram as you can get. Every mb counts. And a > livecd takes away A LOT of ram. Even more stupid - a livecd with > gnome (which is the DE with the biggest ram usage). > > So we have a livecd, which is stupid in itself, for installing and a > buggy installer - only because to prevent some idiots from reading > the documentation. > > Is that really smart? If your goal is, "We produce Gentoo Linux, a special flavor of Linux that can be automatically optimized and customized for just about any application or need. Extreme performance, configurability and a top-notch user and developer community are all hallmarks of the Gentoo experience. " I think it's very smart to produce both a livecd and a minimal. Oh and by the way, I agree with all your points wholeheartedly. But I think getting rid of the livecd (or not putting substantial efforts into its betterment) would be a move in the wrong direction. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
