Re: Latest Mandrake
Hello,
btw, no need to Cc: me, I'm on the list...
Perhaps there are some misunderstandings. I'd like to clean up.
On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 08:48:22PM +0200, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> Toni Mueller wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 06:07:45PM +0200, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote:
> > > The guys who used it could start "net sharing" without editing any
> > what's "net sharing"?
> That's what read on the darkconf applet I guess. You know, sharing a
> single internet connection... I guess you need IP masq. for
I also don't know what "darkconf" is, but I konw what NAT is, and
it's mostly easy to set up.
> > > to other people (using windows) with dhcp. And surely, those people
> > DHCP I find mediocre of not _much_ value (at least it lacks some
> > nice features compared to bootp and in the implementation that
> > shipped with potato).
> DHCP is more recent and widely accepted, and more general BTW.
This may well be since it is mass distributed with almost all M$
systems nowadays, but the DHCP implementation in potato (ie, ISC
DHCP) does either not document or not have some features I like
in bootp, or I'm completely blind. Like specifying boot images
and such... ok, maybe scratch that, it lacked some features in
slink (and I need to read up :( ).
> > > a horrible "linux system administrator" guy who would configure the
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ That would be me...
> > What's your profession?
> Doin' some sysadmin tasks for helping people in the dept. but otherwise
> I'm a programmer and student.
Ok, I'm a guy that sells Linux service and support, amongst others...
I'd like to tear off that "user enemy and secret magic" image that
Debian has off, however, to help deploy Debian and thus also
increase my sales.
> No, well the wizards are phenomenal in that they prevent the user
> from using some features or restraining the way with which she interacts
> with the configuration.
That's what I meant to ask...
> > It's probably something to do with that infamous "volunteer effort".
> What I mean is: on my woody box I probably have to do a lot of reading and
> tweaking and stupid editing to enable the gnome keyboard switching applet
> or you know using that other language for my programs...
And what i mean is: Nobody got around doing it for Debian yet. Also,
I am probably not the best guy to implement your language. Someone
of your language would likely be much more successful at that.
> > ... and yield complete(ly) unusable menus for every window manager on the
> > system...
I just thought of all the menus that Debian by default creates which
are sort of complete in that they contain many many programs in their
trees, but imho are mighty unwieldy for real work. I cut down on them
and have my favourite apps on the top level for fast access, and
that's mostly it.
> Why should that be implemented as menus? I don't see a reason. But GUIs for
I didn't want to say that you need to create a menu, I think that
Debian is already overdoing that a bit.
> GNOME, KDE, plain X11 and console would be good. And BTW, I'm not referring
Especially if they work.
> to debconf here in case you haven't noticed. This is not about the glorious
Well, I wasn't referring to debconf either, but to the system as it
is after installation, but before customization.
Best Regards,
--Toni++
Reply to: