Re: Proposal for new architecture support/distribution
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 07:54:41PM -0500, Phillip R. Jaenke wrote:
> I honestly cannot say I have seen a Linux system acting as a fileserver,
> or a workgroup server of any sort, in the sense of handling user logins
> and home directories, as well as applications.
I have. The trouble is that Samba isn't poised to replace NT in this
area since most organizations (needing Samba) already have an NT
domain and aren't prepared to abandon it. Note that they chose NT in
the first place. BTW, there is some speculation that Samba isn't
*really* faster than NT on the same hardware. I haven't heard doubts
as to the greater stability of the underlying OS.
> > Basically, all Debian distributions look the same, regardless of the
> > underlying architecture - because they are built from the same set of
> > sources.
>
[deletia]
> Secondly; I propose the beginnings of a Debian offshoot. Now, something
> tells me that this will be met with a great deal of resistance (from the
> people who brought you vrms.deb;), but I believe it may be in all of our
> best interests, to further garner market approval and acceptance of Linux.
No one is going to tell you that you can't do XZY with Debian...as
long as you abide by the licenses. Making Debian more appealing and
accessible to suit-wearers is a clear and positive intent. I don't
see any reason for there to be an 'offshoot' project since there is
nothing to leave behind. In other words, we can improve existing
configuration management, add new architectures, and support
commercial apps (as debs) without doing anything different than we
already do. What's to resist?
Reply to: