Re: [dev] Distribution
I'd say one of the BSD's or (Gen|Fun)too. But that's just me. On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Sir Cyrus sircy...@gmail.com wrote: What's the most suckless Linux distribution?
Re: [dev] Distribution
On Fri, 3 Jun 2011 17:01:54 +0100, garbeam wrote: On 3 June 2011 12:41, Sir Cyrus sircy...@gmail.com wrote: What's the most suckless Linux distribution? http://bellard.org/jslinux/ So the most suckless Linux is a Linux that requires a bloated Javascript VM to run? -- catwell
Re: [dev] Distribution
Linux ≠ suckless On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Sir Cyrus sircy...@gmail.com wrote: What's the most suckless Linux distribution?
Re: [dev] Distribution
On 6/3/11, pmarin pacog...@gmail.com wrote: Linux ≠ suckless Linux is extremely configurable, at configure time. You can make it into whatever your want at build time, strip out the support for BSD slices, SCSI and ATA and it'll just run (or not run, that is the question). It's not even hackish.
Re: [dev] Distribution
On Fri, 3 Jun 2011 12:41:24 +0100, Sir Cyrus sircy...@gmail.com wrote: What's the most suckless Linux distribution? Perhaps not the *most* suckless, but Arch [1] is a very worthy contender IMHO. Their manifesto [2] is very similar to suckless.org's. [1] https://www.archlinux.org/ [2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/The_Arch_Way -- Pieter
Re: [dev] Distribution
Sabotage.
Re: [dev] Distribution
On 3 June 2011 12:41, Sir Cyrus sircy...@gmail.com wrote: What's the most suckless Linux distribution? http://bellard.org/jslinux/ --garbeam
Re: [dev] Distribution
2010/1/20 Josh Rickmar joshua_rick...@eumx.net OpenBSD is switching to pcc, or it appears very likely that it will sometime in the future. http://www.undeadly.org/cgi?action=articlesid=20091228231142 I love PPC! -- MfG Kai Heide Es reitet der Heidereiter durch die Heide weiter
Re: [dev] Distribution
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 10:34:47PM -0500, Samuel Baldwin wrote: 2010/1/18 Jacob Todd jaketodd...@gmail.com: I heard they made a sport out of gcc, it's called gentoo or something -Uriel I use Gentoo and Plan 9. Has anyone made gentoo work with anything besides gcc, like pcc or tcc? -- Samuel Baldwin - logik.li I used to have a chroot of funtoo that used clang. I didn't try building X with it, but most things compiled fine. I think coreutils and svn were some of the things that didn't compile, but nothing of value was lost ;). I'll have to try it out again one day. -- Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. pgpBEaKtxGTo2.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [dev] Distribution
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 10:50:29PM -0600, Kurt H Maier wrote: On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 10:23 PM, Samuel Baldwin recursive.for...@gmail.com wrote: Extremely valid point. Are there any distros, gentoo or not, that don't use gcc in favour of something a little saner, though? Obviously Plan 9 doesn't count. I think the FreeBSD guys are working on a version built with clang. I don't think the linux kernel can be compiled with anything but gcc. OpenBSD is switching to pcc, or it appears very likely that it will sometime in the future. http://www.undeadly.org/cgi?action=articlesid=20091228231142
[dev] Distribution
I was wondering what distros people use on this mailing list? I've tried a lot and I'm not happy with any of them. All I need is a toolchain/dev utils with minimal X install. I would then compile all the apps/dwm myself and install using the package manager. Arch Linux comes pretty close but some things about it bug me. They use some pre-release stuff such as the X-server by default. Most of the PKGBUILDs use fakeroot for the whole build and the fakeroot docs say you should only use it for the make install. Crux is even simpler than Arch but it's setup for compiling as root, ugh. I have done an LFS/DIY build but then I had a look at the Xorg website: The best place to get X is from your operating system or distribution vendor. That bugged me a bit but I downloaded the tarball for the server expecting to find some compilation instructions... it doesn't even have a README! I guess Xorg don't expect mere mortals such as myself to attempt to compile it. Any suggestions? Jon.
Re: [dev] Distribution
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Jonathan Slark jonathan.sl...@talktalk.net wrote: PKGBUILDs use fakeroot for the whole build and the fakeroot docs say you should only use it for the make install. I have done an LFS/DIY build but then I had a look at the Xorg website: The best place to get X is from your operating system or distribution vendor. snip I think you're reading too much into recommendations. From reading this, all I get is that general upstream recommendations are keeping you from doing what you want. If everybody used this reasoning, then no distro would've continued after reading the specs for LSB or POSIX.
Re: [dev] Distribution
On 18-01-2010 22:41:01, Jonathan Slark wrote: I was wondering what distros people use on this mailing list? I've tried a lot and I'm not happy with any of them. All I need is a toolchain/dev utils with minimal X install. I would then compile all the apps/dwm myself and install using the package manager. Crux is even simpler than Arch but it's setup for compiling as root, ugh. You can easily setup fakerooting when building ports, just lookup the wiki. Regards, Ted
Re: [dev] Distribution
All I need is a toolchain/dev utils with minimal X install. Have you tried NetBSD? I prefer that over Linux, and the base installation is exactly what you're describing.
Re: [dev] Distribution
Jonathan Slark dixit (2010-01-18, 22:41): I was wondering what distros people use on this mailing list? I've tried a lot and I'm not happy with any of them. All I need is a toolchain/dev utils with minimal X install. I would then compile all the apps/dwm myself and install using the package manager. Sounds like Gentoo, to me. Hope this thread doesn't turn into yet another flamewar and bitching how-broken-is-some-distro-i-am-not-actually-using. I propose that people (criticise|advertise) only distros they're actually using for getting day-to-day stuff done. -- [a]
Re: [dev] Distribution
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 5:41 PM, Jonathan Slark jonathan.sl...@talktalk.net wrote: I was wondering what distros people use on this mailing list? I'll go ahead and get the flame-war rolling... [q9550 ~]:$ uname -a ; cat /etc/debian_version ; uptime Linux q9550.0x95.net 2.6.26-2-amd64 #1 SMP Thu Nov 5 02:23:12 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux 5.0.3 19:08:03 up 58 days, 3:08, 7 users, load average: 0.27, 0.26, 0.26 [q9550 ~]:$ In addition to RedHat for enterprise environments, I've used debian (stable/main) on and off personally for close to a decade. Have to give credit to Jason at senet.us; he's responsible for introducing me to dwm, which ultimately lead to my freedom (from Windows). Gnome and KDE at the time just seemed like a step in the wrong direction (even from Windows), so I'm about as happy as a pig in sh-t. If you consider yourself unhappy now, try firing up Windows and see how happy that makes you. The thought of using Windows again just reinforces my appreciation for the debian/dwm setup I'm using. Usually puts a big grin on my face. Best of luck. Regards, Guy
Re: [dev] Distribution
Jonathan Slark wrote: I was wondering what distros people use on this mailing list? I've tried a lot and I'm not happy with any of them. All I need is a toolchain/dev utils with minimal X install. I would then compile all the apps/dwm myself and install using the package manager. you must try slitaz.org, a minimalist mercurial based distro with liveCD leanings, djp
Re: [dev] Distribution
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 10:41:01PM +, Jonathan Slark wrote: I was wondering what distros people use on this mailing list? I've tried a lot and I'm not happy with any of them. All I need is a toolchain/dev utils with minimal X install. I would then compile all the apps/dwm myself and install using the package manager. Arch Linux comes pretty close but some things about it bug me. They use some pre-release stuff such as the X-server by default. Most of the PKGBUILDs use fakeroot for the whole build and the fakeroot docs say you should only use it for the make install. Crux is even simpler than Arch but it's setup for compiling as root, ugh. I have done an LFS/DIY build but then I had a look at the Xorg website: The best place to get X is from your operating system or distribution vendor. That bugged me a bit but I downloaded the tarball for the server expecting to find some compilation instructions... it doesn't even have a README! I guess Xorg don't expect mere mortals such as myself to attempt to compile it. Any suggestions? Jon. I heard they made a sport out of gcc, it's called gentoo or something -Uriel I use Gentoo and Plan 9. -- Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else. pgpetEu5WO2BK.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [dev] Distribution
2010/1/18 Jacob Todd jaketodd...@gmail.com: I heard they made a sport out of gcc, it's called gentoo or something -Uriel I use Gentoo and Plan 9. Has anyone made gentoo work with anything besides gcc, like pcc or tcc? -- Samuel Baldwin - logik.li
Re: [dev] Distribution
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 9:34 PM, Samuel Baldwin recursive.for...@gmail.com wrote: Has anyone made gentoo work with anything besides gcc, like pcc or tcc? people who don't use gcc have better sense than to use gentoo -- # Kurt H Maier
Re: [dev] Distribution
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 10:23 PM, Samuel Baldwin recursive.for...@gmail.com wrote: Extremely valid point. Are there any distros, gentoo or not, that don't use gcc in favour of something a little saner, though? Obviously Plan 9 doesn't count. I think the FreeBSD guys are working on a version built with clang. I don't think the linux kernel can be compiled with anything but gcc. -- # Kurt H Maier
