[2267] in SIPB_Linux_Development
Re: Linux Athena questions
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
Wed Oct 21 11:18:59 1998
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:14:35 -0400
From: tb@MIT.EDU (Thomas Bushnell, BSG)
To: linux-dev@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: "Patrick McCormick"'s message of Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:04:02 -0400
<000701bdfd04$0a3a95b0$1f004212@modigliani.MIT.EDU>
From: "Patrick McCormick" <pmccormi@MIT.EDU>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 11:04:02 -0400
Why is a clueless-user-friendly installation irrelevant for an Athena port?
(or did I misinterpret?) A significant fraction of Linux-Athena users are
people who want their home computer to be "just like Athena" and who don't
want/need to know a whole lot about Linux. I think that Redhat's
installation procedure is a big reason why it's a good current choice for
the Athena-Linux base distribution.
Because we have to do the installation ourselves anyway. Debian has
all the same tools, just not the same automated scripts as, say,
SuSE. (It has scripts actually but they are inferior.) But we need
to do the scripts ourselves anyway to have a real Athena port.
