Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 04:07:38PM +0200, George Makrydakis wrote:
>
>> Cross platform code runs everywhere.
>>
>
> Um, yeah (at least in theory), but does that actually help? See the
> question below that you didn't answer:
>
>
>>> But what does running it on a W
On Monday 03 March 2008 22:00:39 George Makrydakis wrote:
> On Monday 03 March 2008 20:57:48 Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> [snip]
> It's irrelevant to what I was saying, yes. I wasn't saying "we should
> let users read from any OS/browser/whatever" on its own. I was saying
> it, leading into the pare
On Monday 03 March 2008 20:57:48 Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 04:07:38PM +0200, George Makrydakis wrote:
> > Cross platform code runs everywhere.
>
> Um, yeah (at least in theory), but does that actually help? See the
>
> question below that you didn't answer:
> > > But what does
On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 04:07:38PM +0200, George Makrydakis wrote:
> Cross platform code runs everywhere.
Um, yeah (at least in theory), but does that actually help? See the
question below that you didn't answer:
> > But what does running it on a Windows box actually gain us, that
> > presenting
On Monday 03 March 2008 16:07:38 George Makrydakis wrote:
> Writing the same in C++ uses 10% of these features if not less and its power
shines when you do not use it as a C superset.
to :
Writing the same in C++ uses 10% of the LANGUAGE FEATURES if not less and its
power shines when you do not
On Monday 03 March 2008 05:03:56 Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> George Makrydakis wrote:
> > First of all, Joe Sixpack is David's term.
>
> Yeah, I know that...
>
> > Second, I did not use Windows before Linux :)
>
> I'm not talking about you.
I do know that, but I also wanted to make it clear
> I'm talki
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
George Makrydakis wrote:
> First of all, Joe Sixpack is David's term.
Yeah, I know that...
> Second, I did not use Windows before Linux :)
I'm not talking about you.
I'm talking about the people that you seem to want to use your program
- -- t
On Sunday 02 March 2008 21:33:42 Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> I think it's a really bad idea for us to specifically try to teach
> anything to Joe Sixpack that's never even used Linux. Note I'm not
> saying that everyone who uses LFS had used Linux before they started --
> but those that didn't are mos
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
George Makrydakis wrote:
> On Sunday 02 March 2008 02:02:23 David Jensen wrote:
>> George Makrydakis wrote:
>>> You know what? This can work on windows as well.
>> LOL, and joe-sixpack visits LFS and clicks install ubuntu clone
>> now!
>
> What i
On Sunday 02 March 2008 02:02:23 David Jensen wrote:
> George Makrydakis wrote:
> > You know what? This can work on windows as well.
>
> LOL, and joe-sixpack visits LFS and clicks install ubuntu clone now!
What is the lol about?
Since when it was impossible to compile cross - platform compatible
George Makrydakis wrote:
> You know what? This can work on windows as well.
LOL, and joe-sixpack visits LFS and clicks install ubuntu clone now!
---
David Jensen
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above informat
On Saturday 01 March 2008 22:51:30 Dave Wheeler wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 10:15 AM, George Makrydakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > This means that the entire design should focus on the fact that you are
> > dealing with a database by itself, not a book.
>
> Seems like a much simpler soluti
On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 10:15 AM, George Makrydakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This means that the entire design should focus on the fact that you are
> dealing with a database by itself, not a book.
Seems like a much simpler solution would be to transform the book into
something else an automate
On Saturday 01 March 2008 20:21:19 David Jensen wrote:
> George Makrydakis wrote:
> > Actually, what is necessary is to have a system that deals with
> > dependency resolution outside and over any package manager involved in
> > this process, for obvious reasons. Transforming the content from a new
George Makrydakis wrote:
> Actually, what is necessary is to have a system that deals with dependency
> resolution outside and over any package manager involved in this process, for
> obvious reasons. Transforming the content from a new "book" format into RPM,
> DEB, TGZ or requires a system co
On Saturday 01 March 2008 18:07:59 David Jensen wrote:
> TheOldFellow wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:06:41 -0700
> >
> > Gerard Beekmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> What if LFS wasn't in book form anymore. What if it's an interactive
> >> program instead. A 100% merge of LFS, BLFS, ALFS, LFS
TheOldFellow wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:06:41 -0700
> Gerard Beekmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> What if LFS wasn't in book form anymore. What if it's an interactive
>> program instead. A 100% merge of LFS, BLFS, ALFS, LFS.
>
>
> I like this.
>
> The design could be quite difficult a
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:06:41 -0700
Gerard Beekmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What if LFS wasn't in book form anymore. What if it's an interactive
> program instead. A 100% merge of LFS, BLFS, ALFS, LFS.
I like this.
The design could be quite difficult as it probably will
need to run in a nu
DJ Lucas wrote:
>
> OK, so a more pronounced idea has been expressed, and I do like where
> it's going. Now where to start? Proposals to solidify those ideas?
>
> But I think this should have waited...one thing at a time here. I'm
> kind of thinking that it's easiest to start from the packa
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
Oops, I forgot to touch on this:
> However, with the current BLFS policy on the default ./configure line
> (don't include swiches that rely on optional dependencies), any kind
> of standartized common automation procedure is likely to fail.
That policy will simply no
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
>
> IOW: one has to see reasons for all dependencies, and the associated
> problems, _before_ starting the installation.
>
The PM would have to account for required and optional dependencies, and
tell you what each provides and any pitfalls. Ugh...my thoughts on
Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> What if LFS wasn't in book form anymore. What if it's an interactive
> program instead. A 100% merge of LFS, BLFS, ALFS, LFS.
>
> It starts with running the LFS program (be it a real program or
> collection of scripts). What is now the LFS book is on-screen instead.
> Y
2008/2/28, J. Greenlees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> > Correct, that's a way to deliver information. It does work for a
> > single author. However, here you are wandering into the unexplored
> > territory of collaborated video editing.
>
>
> not really, collaborative vid
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> 2008/2/28, J. Greenlees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Ok, how about something completely different then, go multimedia in a
>> lot of the presentation of information.
>> recordmydesktop, and the gtk interface for it will create ogg video
>> clips of what you are doing on
2008/2/28, J. Greenlees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Ok, how about something completely different then, go multimedia in a
> lot of the presentation of information.
> recordmydesktop, and the gtk interface for it will create ogg video
> clips of what you are doing on your desktop, with audio track for
Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> What if LFS wasn't in book form anymore. What if it's an interactive
> program instead. A 100% merge of LFS, BLFS, ALFS, LFS.
>
> It starts with running the LFS program (be it a real program or
> collection of scripts). What is now the LFS book is on-screen instead.
> Y
Gerard Beekmans wrote:
>
> Think outside the current HTML box for a minute. Not for technical
> reasons but convenience. I've been wondering for a while if there's a
> case to be made for seeing installation output and the book's
> (replacement) text in the same window. I can see this be a nic
2008/2/28, Gerard Beekmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I've been wondering for a while if there's a
> case to be made for seeing installation output and the book's
> (replacement) text in the same window. I can see this be a nice change
> for installation modes where you are text-only.
Blind people
2008/2/28, Gerard Beekmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I think it is a bad idea to force interactivity for a program,
> > especially for those who are not first-time visitors.
>
>
> My counter-argument: turn it off when it's not desired. It's not that
> hard to stop a program from showing output you
> I think it is a bad idea to force interactivity for a program,
> especially for those who are not first-time visitors.
My counter-argument: turn it off when it's not desired. It's not that
hard to stop a program from showing output you don't want (anymore).
> However, with the current BLFS pol
2008/2/28, Gerard Beekmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> What if LFS wasn't in book form anymore. What if it's an interactive
> program instead. A 100% merge of LFS, BLFS, ALFS, LFS.
>
> It starts with running the LFS program (be it a real program or
> collection of scripts). What is now the LFS book i
All:
For what it's worth (been building LFS for a couple of years now and only
very recently started posting to LFS-DEV as a way of "paying back"), I
always thought that the educational goals of LFS were it's strongest
points.
There is value in what you propose, however there will and should
alwa
On Thursday 28 February 2008 01:06:41 Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> What if LFS wasn't in book form anymore. What if it's an interactive
> program instead. A 100% merge of LFS, BLFS, ALFS, LFS.
This requires a glue point (book, and non book - form). You will have that.
But does your LFS actually _exc
Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> Just some more food for thoughts. While we're discussing let's also take
> the time to think outside the box. Abandon, at least in theory, anything
> that is currently LFS, pre-conceived notions and otherwise, and see what
> happens when we re-invent LFS and the way we d
34 matches
Mail list logo
