Off-Topic > Off-Topic - Tiny Core Lounge
why do you leave TinyCoreLinux and where do u go after?
vinnie:
@bmarkus
That the package management is sufficient for use but could be better, I think that the best management I've seen is the one used in the arch aur (script-based), allows you to browse/update/edit software better.
Regarding the missed support, I'm not complaining because my English is very bad and I think that is not too pleasant reply to me, but very often I have not had replies to my messages.
hiro:
The best management is no management.
tinycore doesn't put on huge layers of duct tape just to then have to rip it off again and get caught up in the sticky leftovers.
bmarkus:
--- Quote from: vinnie on October 18, 2013, 09:00:22 AM ---@bmarkus
That the package management is sufficient for use but could be better, I think that the best management I've seen is the one used in the arch aur (script-based), allows you to browse/update/edit software better.
--- End quote ---
Everything can be better.
Edit software via package management? How do you mean?
vinnie:
@hiro I do not agree, good organization allow to better solve the problems, let's take a stupid example (also valid to answer bmarkus):
Every time we update the kernel there is the usual problem with programs that lose compatibility (and this round it is exacerbated by the loss of scm).
This is normal administration, but if we had a unified management of the scripts we could better handle the issue.
Let's take a packet at random from aur: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/vboxgtk/
People can easily vote for it, comment on it, observe the code, download the source, Read the comments, you'll notice several reports.
Simplify access to this information could mean increasing the participation of people.
Also maintain a repository of scripts is to have few limitations of space (and I remember we had this problem in the past) and would also increase the safety of the packages (since the compilation would be just in time, with the code under the eyes).
If we wanted to exaggerate, we could even think to automate the reconstruction of critical packages every time we update a kernel or when a new dependency is updated.
We could make sure that meo have the latest minor version of firefox in complete autonomy, the minute after its release (just kidding but it is a plausible perspective, I hope that meo do not get angry :P )
However, these are not things that I claim, but I'm still stuck to the fourth version of tinycore for missing application and I do not have the ability to solve alone.
Do not take it as a protest, I still consider tinycore as a great gift to the community, and just know that I am sorry to observe the presence of these problems.
Misalf:
Two cents: Editing a certain software's behavior has never been so easy for me as it is when using Tiny Core.
Well, to be able to create personal extensions, I always have to look up on the net for correct commands or file/folder access rights, but thats linux - or - thats 'computing'. While tiny core beeing a 'small' distro (less people), it's naturally more unlikely that certain requests can get deepy investigeted because the goal is to create a Tiny base that does work - We, the users have to add the cany if we want but we don't really 'need' to. The rest is still up to us. For me it seems people are getting much help on the forum even if they try to do something 'special'. It's always a hassle for me - competing with computers - with tiny core I'm able to make apps to work as I say whithout having to touch the real system (buried files which might be waste in the future),
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version