Re: [dwm] 9ubuntu?

As much as I like Debian/Ubuntu I'd second Arch as well. It provides
all the tools required for compilation as a base, it would take a few
minutes to create some sort of suckless-tools dummy package, has a
simple and fairly vanilla configuration base and it has every
application you've listed to be installed by default in its
repositories. The only thing I see taking a while is a new
livecd/install cd, but it couldn't be any harder than creating a new
Ubuntu one.

On 3/14/07, Stalwart <stlwrt_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> Slackware (and its forks), Crux (and its forks including ArchLinux)
> and source-based distros (gentoo, smgl) rule because they're simple
> (well, except gentoo). Debian is too automated and has (imho) too much
> strange scripts. ArchLinux minimal install is ~100Mb, but full
> dwm-environment can be <250Mb. Same with slack
>
>
> On 3/14/07, Michael Muster <a-chopper_AT_gmx.de> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I, don't see a reason why it is necessary to start a new distribution.
> > If you install a minimal debian by selecting nothing when tasksel
> > asks, you get a minimal system where everyone can install what he/she
> > wants.
> > For an minimal dwm-system an
> > aptitude install x-window-system-core and a few
> > x-libs to compile dwm should work.
> > Perhaps add build-essential, xterm, and an editor and the system is
> > ready for use.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> >
>
>

-- 
Callan Barrett