Shell-Linux (Micro Core Fork)(New Release: 3.5)

[crazycoder13]

I have updated Shell-Linux 
Can anyone help with package compiling and adding?

[gerald_clark]

We don't do support of forks.

[coreplayer2]

There is something strange and suspicious about this 

Can't exactly put my finger on it but just the "us.to" domain has to raise red flags

Just saying..

[tinypoodle]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_(software_development)

[bmarkus]

There is something strange and suspicious about this 

Can't exactly put my finger on it but just the "us.to" domain has to raise red flags

Just saying..

us.to is a bad choice mooving from .ru for a US LINUX team when .org domains are available cheap, $4.99/year It has a bad message.

Also do not understand why is it based on 3.5 when current upstream is 4.7

More over this feature list is interesting:

Some Shell-Linux Features
    Stand Alone Package Manager (Coded in Bash Script)
    90% Stable
    6.6MB ISO image (Runs on 32MB or RAM)
    User Friendly (Great for Linux Newbies)
    Network Support (Networking works)

What 'Runs on 32MB or RAM)' means? An op sys with 90% stable? What does it mean. Also, networking works. What does it mean? Finally, I don't think such a system can be user friendly nor great for newbies.

Sorry being negative, but hope this feedback helps creators.

[tinypoodle]

Is it only me or is there rather some irony in the fact that a fork is named "Shell-Linux" and declares "Stand Alone Package Manager (Coded in Bash Script)" when Core's package manager is actually coded in sh?

[hiro]

hehe, requesting rename to bash-linux.

i honestly think that domain names don't matter.

[hiro]

but looking at the font of the website I now also think this fork is just a troll. I fear there will be goatse as a boot screen...

[crazycoder13]

1) I recoded the package manager using the Standard shell
2) I updated the website, and I am not a troll
3) I do not have a paypal or credit card to pay for a Domain
4) I am here to show people my work, please do not be so harsh on me

[crazycoder13]

We don't do support of forks.

I Emailed Robert and he said it was fine to Fork MicroCore linux as long as i went by the GPL Version 2 License

[curaga]

He means here on the forum. Forks are allowed by the license, but discussion and support of them should be on their own forum.

[tinypoodle]

1) I recoded the package manager using the Standard shell

Good to hear, so no technical irony, but rather a communication error, I'd guess.

[tinypoodle]

We don't do support of forks.

I Emailed Robert and he said it was fine to Fork MicroCore linux as long as i went by the GPL Version 2 License

No-one ever implied forking wasn't ok, and there is nothing particular to Core about that...

Answer was already provided by link in Reply #18

Free and open source software is that which, by definition, may be forked from the original development team without prior permission without violating any copyright law.

I encourage you to read the whole article.

[hiro]

if at all this should be about pragmatic value, not about legalities.
i haven't had time to try it so I don't know what makes it more minimal or better or at least different than tinycore. important details would be what kernel and what main libraries and what aims the distro has in comparison to e.g. tinycore. what has been changed? are the shell scripts now much shorter? did you leave out lots of functionality, features, gaining easier overview and clarity when you look through how the whole system works? does it still use squashfs mounts and and ramfs as root?
just some encouraging thoughts of mine.

[Rich]

Anyone wishing to discuss or ask questions about this distro can do so by visiting:
http://shellinux.us.to/
That site has its own forum. This thread is now locked.