118 replies to this topic

[+Stocker360]

I'm really sorry guys, had a lot of stuff on my plate atm. I know it isnt cool for me not to post anything, and I apologise, but now that everything personally is sorted, I am still here, and I still want to get this going.

Looking at a few peoples comments, is Arch the best way to go forward, if it looks like there are people that still want to contribute, but wont because of the base choice, would it not be best to change it so we can actually get something started?

[Nothing Here]

Stocker360, on 09 September 2012 - 21:09, said:

I'm really sorry guys, had a lot of stuff on my plate atm. I know it isnt cool for me not to post anything, and I apologise, but now that everything personally is sorted, I am still here, and I still want to get this going.

Looking at a few peoples comments, is Arch the best way to go forward, if it looks like there are people that still want to contribute, but wont because of the base choice, would it not be best to change it so we can actually get something started?

If you take another poll on this, the outcome will point right back to using Arch again. Your the project lead. Take awhile weight the pros and cons, find the best avenue and you make the decision. But no more polls on what it should be based on.

[+Stocker360]

Lo Tec, on 09 September 2012 - 21:25, said:

If you take another poll on this, the outcome will point right back to using Arch again. Your the project lead. Take awhile weight the pros and cons, find the best avenue and you make the decision. But no more polls on what it should be based on.

You raise a good point, im going to have a think about things. Is anyone around on IRC tonight? I should be around for at least the next 2-3 hours.

[Kami-]

Lo Tec, on 09 September 2012 - 20:50, said:

Because I hate Arch. Might as well be Egyptian hieroglyphics. If we can actually base this on Fedora or Debian, then I am all in.

Sadly, I can't see a shift in base for the benefit of one extra developer.

What is the root cause of your disdain for Arch?

[Nothing Here]

Arch has taken simple commands and made them difficult or impossible to understand. If everyone feels so strongly in keeping it Arch, then by all means, do so. But how many of you Arch folks are actually willing to help? Very few. So keep it Arch and a few will help. Change it and if you look at the other Shift2 threads, you will see more then just I willing to help.

[n_K]

I'm only working on shift2 if it's arch.
Fedora is distinctly outdated with it's reliance on such an outdated package management system and debian has been forked so many times it's unbelievable.
The point of arch was to get things set up starting from a minimalistic base and do everything manually, if you're using fedora or debian all you'd do it install some defaultly-compiled packages, make an ISO and that's it. I don't see anything skillful, technical or experience-giving about that.
Arch on the other hand, you've got to make your own repos, compile your own packages and set everything up by hand, and that's pretty involved.

Anyway, I'm not sure if we're going with the C# installer? I can get PHP 5.2 compiled with GTK2 support and make a basic installer GUI if not, or unless someone wants to do it in python2 and GTK?
Not sure if it's worth making a live-CD before we've got an installer created? Making a live CD won't be too hard, to get X working you just need to load basic vesa drivers or do lspci and check if an intel/nvidia/ati GPU is present and load the right config and kernel modules or load svga as a backup.

EDIT: In-fact, as choice is best for everyone be involved in, why not all (that want to) make a basic installer in C#, PYGTK oh PHP-GTK or alternative and submit it for people to see what it looks and handles like and we can see which one people prefer?
And I won't be able to get on IRC tonight, on macbook just now reading some stuff before I go to bed ;/

Edited by n_K, 09 September 2012 - 22:19.

[+Stocker360]

n_K, on 09 September 2012 - 22:15, said:

I'm only working on shift2 if it's arch.
Fedora is distinctly outdated with it's reliance on such an outdated package management system and debian has been forked so many times it's unbelievable.
The point of arch was to get things set up starting from a minimalistic base and do everything manually, if you're using fedora or debian all you'd do it install some defaultly-compiled packages, make an ISO and that's it. I don't see anything skillful, technical or experience-giving about that.
Arch on the other hand, you've got to make your own repos, compile your own packages and set everything up by hand, and that's pretty involved.

Anyway, I'm not sure if we're going with the C# installer? I can get PHP 5.2 compiled with GTK2 support and make a basic installer GUI if not, or unless someone wants to do it in python2 and GTK?
Not sure if it's worth making a live-CD before we've got an installer created? Making a live CD won't be too hard, to get X working you just need to load basic vesa drivers or do lspci and check if an intel/nvidia/ati GPU is present and load the right config and kernel modules or load svga as a backup.

EDIT: In-fact, as choice is best for everyone be involved in, why not all (that want to) make a basic installer in C#, PYGTK oh PHP-GTK or alternative and submit it for people to see what it looks and handles like and we can see which one people prefer?

That is the benefit of going with Arch, more control
It is more complex but it pays off.

At the end of the day n_K you are right, if anyone wants to make a basic installer and submit it so we can call all go over it then that is great.

[Nothing Here]

Stocker360, on 09 September 2012 - 22:21, said:

That is the benefit of going with Arch, more control
It is more complex but it pays off.

At the end of the day n_K you are right, if anyone wants to make a basic installer and submit it so we can call all go over it then that is great.

Glad to see you took the time to think it over. Typical.

[firey]

I too am busy with life, and other coding projects to focus as much a I planned. I am with n_k in that Arch is the base to go with. I feel Fedora, Debian, etc are already filled to the rafters with tools and utilities, not really a whole lot to add or to make a system out of that is our own. Arch is very very easy to get going even on old hardware. I've installed on numerous devices and have them all setup and running the exact same with little to no issues. I want to dev for an Arch based distro as I feel my code will be much more utillized.

I couldn't get code to upload to the repo. I have the basic gui installer for apps done.

Supports downloading/installing off the official repos, as well as the unzip,makepkg,install of .tar.gz files, and the ability to auto-update. Really all it is is running processes under one program but it saves having to type it all out.

It's nothing fancy and could use a lot of work.. but that said it does function. Overall.. to make an actual system installer is doing the same sort of thing.. running commands and showing some pictures.

[Haggis]

As i say once the basis GUI is done and it gets me to a desktop

I have tried countless times to get this working and cant

maybe i am just a complete dumbass

at first i thought it was my hardware but then i used archbang which is a Arch Live CD

i then tried to install gnome and borked it

Arch seems way too easy to break, i have even seen some of you guys leaving messages saying broken my arch VM need to redo it

[firey]

Haggis, on 10 September 2012 - 07:55, said:

As i say once the basis GUI is done and it gets me to a desktop

I have tried countless times to get this working and cant

maybe i am just a complete dumbass

at first i thought it was my hardware but then i used archbang which is a Arch Live CD

i then tried to install gnome and borked it

Arch seems way too easy to break, i have even seen some of you guys leaving messages saying broken my arch VM need to redo it

Arch is pretty easy to get going once you have done it.

1) Setup DHCP/Internet
2) Setup HDDs
3) Install Base/Base Devel
4) Setup Files (Hostname, Hosts, Time (optional))
5) Make a user
6) Install your bootloader/configure
7) Reboot
8) Install X
9) Install Gnome
10) Install GDM
11) Install DBus and add it to daemons
12) Reboot
13) Login as root and run gdm (optionally add GDM to X Startup so that once you login GDM auto-boots). From there.. you have a nice gui (I then install cinnamon, and set it to auto load a cinnamon session on login).

[Haggis]

Thinking i am just going to install archbang

Its ARCH but with a DE, Openbox and Configuration done for you

although i did install it in a VM previously went to install gnome and broke it lmao

[Glassed Silver]

I'm one of the couple of guys who signed up to work on it and I must say I'm still interested.
I kind of lost the touch with the project when it got going so quick with so many threads going on...
I really think that we should have ONE central place to see an overview of all the discussion (even just links to forum postings etc etc)...

When I haven't been active on Neowin, came back and saw that so much talk had already been made without me (not blaming ^^) I was surprised people had gone ahead so quickly, so I gave up for a moment, because catching up was hard to do with all that stuff going on in my offline life.
After then I slacked and now I noticed myself the project is somehow a little sleepy.

I'm willing to contribute as graphics designer and photographer again, I somehow wish that catching up would be easier, because there will constantly be people who are stressed out in real life and have to slack a bit.
Re-entering the project should be simpler.
Maybe that's just me.

Glassed Silver:mac

[+Stocker360]

Lo Tec, on 10 September 2012 - 01:13, said:

Glad to see you took the time to think it over. Typical.

Wait wait wait.... What?

I havent even said anything yet, if you must know im looking at Ubuntu on my test machine atm anyway, in fact I'm writing this very post on it. All I was doing was agreeing on some of the benefits of Arch.

At the end of the day, regardless of decisions, this is an open source project. If you dont like something, the best thing about it is that you can change it to how you want.

Glassed Silver, it would be nice to have you back with us again, and again I must apologise for letting things get out of hand.

What I do need help is, is with organising things. As you can probably tell Im not the best at organising things and have bursts of threads, which I can see to some people may not be the easiest way to keep up with things. Would a single thread make things any easier though?

[Nothing Here]

Stocker360, on 09 September 2012 - 22:21, said:

.At the end of the day n_K you are right, if anyone wants to make a basic installer and submit it so we can call all go over it then that is great.

This is the comment that made me say that. n_k is probably the only person who can make the installer and if he leaves, then that breaks us. I'd rather see Shift2 make it, then have n_k leave and break it. n_k will only work on Shift2 if it's Arch based. I will only work on it if it's Fedora or Debian based. But in the end, you need people who actually know how to code, not someone who doesn't.