[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: knoppix/bootcd like software?



On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 08:35:42AM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Javier [iso-8859-1] Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> 
> > 	Yes. The software knoppix uses (save for cloop) is not packaged
> > (but its GPLd) IIRC.
> Could someone who knoow the facts better than my perhaps file an RFP / ITP bug?

how bout first we get a list of packages that we'd have to be looking at?
i'll volunteer to take on a package or two (though i'll need a sponsor
for uploads since i'm still in the DAM-approval queue).

> This will become a hard task in the future and makes really no sense if you
> just need a limited subset of the data on this iso image.  It would be
> *really* stupid to grab a complete iso image just to remaster the latest
> Knoppix where just some files might be changed.

and it makes no sense at all if you don't even want knoppix on your cd.
for example, if i want to build my own boot-off-cd firewall, i might not
be interested in the autodetection that knoppix provides.  however, if
i'm building my own desktop-on-a-cd i definitely want that stuff.  imho
it should be just another modular option to be included.

>        dpkg --get-selections | grep knoppix
> you get a certain list of packages.  We should check these packages for
> DFSG complieance and perhaps make them official.  I hope this would perhaps
> take some workload from Klaus Knopper.

unfortunately i just gave my knoppix cd to a friend so she could a
non-bootable system :(

> This is what I wanted to say:  If someone who is deeper involved in Knoppix
> development / remastering would start with a list like:
> 
>    package1: License, URL
>    package2: License, URL
>     ...

> and perhaps would just file ITP / RFP bugs accordingly it would be of
> g help, IMHO.

agreed.  once again, i volunteer to do some of the work if someone finds
out what needs to be done.  


	sean

Attachment: pgpL6tvGi3mgb.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: