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

Re: Hurd F1 ISO and booting

On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Jeff Bailey wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 29, 2001 at 01:43:28PM +0200, Andreas L. Gustafsson wrote:
> > I for one just hate dpkg and friends! :)
> > 
> > If I just can get gcc to work under Hurd I'll be happy again! :)
> > 
> > Seriously, I do think that to make Hurd more popular and more widely used
> > we need to move away from the .deb way only as fast as possible. The most
> > popular Linux systems out there is still rpm based, and to attract more
> > developers to Hurd I think we need a distro based on something else than
> > .deb, but I think that this might not be the best place to discuss it.
> > 
> > If someone has any pointers for me where stuff like this is discussed
> > though, or want to start discussion them. Please mail me! 
> The great part is that this software is GPLd, so you're welcome to do
> 'home brew' type of work.  I used to do this, and found that I learned
> alot about how the Hurd works very quickly.

Would I be here if it wasn't GPLd? :)

> However: Thomas, Roland, Marcus, and Gord use Debian, and like using
> the Debian BTS for tracking bugs.  I think Neal uses Debian.  I only
> report porting problems to the upstream Debian maintainers, and it's
> up to them if they'd like to report portability problems to the
> upstream.  You may find that not using .deb's is a long uphill battle
> without a tremendous amount of support.

But of course not! It's never easy to start a new distrobution. I just
found the idea interesting. I don't know .deb but I know rpm and Solaris
pkgadd and I'd like to use them. If someone else hav had the same thought,
please send me a letter. I'll not hinder or bother you. I just wanted to
try to find someone who felt it was a good idea. If nobode has done any
work to try to pu together a Hurd distro based on e.g. rpm then I think it
should be done, and I'm ready to start lokking into it as soon I know more
about the Hurd.

I don't expect it to be an easy job. I'm not /that/ naive! :)

Well, now back to our regular scheduled discussions, right?


Reply to: