Effort Linux

Posted 9 Nov 2001 at 17:01 UTC by polo Share This

Well. I would like to say a little about the Effort Linux. It is another Linux distribution, that follows GPL and has as objective the security and stability for servers.

The distribution started less than 4 months ago. I was making everything in the measure of possibble to distribute it. But some problems had happened and this complicated the plans. I am looking people with some free time to help me to finish the installer and the packager manager. If someone want to help contact: devel@effortlinux.com.br

Differences?, posted 9 Nov 2001 at 17:35 UTC by Denny » (Journeyer)

What makes Effort Linux different from other distributions, including but not limited to Red Hat, SuSE, Debian, Slackware and Mandrake? Why should people use/work on Effort Linux rather than a distribution that already exists?

I'm not out to shoot your efforts down - it's always good to see people putting effort (no pun intended) into open source projects... I just think you could well have missed out on mentioning something that might be your key promotional point...?


Re: Diferences, posted 9 Nov 2001 at 17:58 UTC by polo » (Journeyer)

Effort Linux was made to be a small distribution with many features that other distributions at general doesn't have, such as: lids, qmail, daemontools, djbdns, ucspi-tcp, and others.. In the most of distributions come with many things that most of users never use. Effort Linux also has your owns projects, such: Effort Installer, Effort Packager Manager, Effort Ports, and others...
Is a attempt to show something different.

There's a reason that distributions don't have those tools, posted 9 Nov 2001 at 19:52 UTC by jbuck » (Master)

Dan Bernstein writes outstanding software, but his insistence on his own licensing terms mean that a distributor cannot support his software, because it's not legal to distribute patches.

More about tools, posted 9 Nov 2001 at 20:20 UTC by polo » (Journeyer)

Your opinion about the tools of DJB can be correct, but, what do you say about the LIDS (Linux Intrusion Detection System) at Effort ?

those packages exist, posted 10 Nov 2001 at 07:21 UTC by mobius » (Master)

A quick check shows that installers or source packages already exist for Debian for most(maybe all, I'm just lazy) of the tools you mentioned. These would be official binary packages except for the aforementioned licensing constraints. There is also a LIDS kernel-patch and admin tool; is this what you meant?

I don't really see why a new distribution with a new package manager is required, especially for a very few tools. Simple installer tools that could be used with other distributions, OTOH, would be an excellent contribution. What sort of installer do you have?

More about Effort, posted 10 Nov 2001 at 13:33 UTC by polo » (Journeyer)

really nothing concrete exists to I make what already exists. but I know that making something I would learn more and thus could help in other things, as for example making programs for all Linux community. This can be strange, but I do the distribution specially for spend the time and learn more. The others packager managers, such as: rpm and deb are very good, but I want to do one.

what's the point?, posted 11 Nov 2001 at 05:37 UTC by jbuck » (Master)

Why bother making yet another Linux distribution? The main problem that the free software community has today is too many redundant and wasteful projects. Who needs a 23rd IRC client or a 150th Linux distribution?

If you're interested in learning something in the area of distributions, why not first try to locate some real need that is going unmet? If you do this and then you meet the need, you'll be a hero to lots of people. Making yet another variant of something that already exists is unlikely to do the job.

not another one..., posted 13 Nov 2001 at 01:10 UTC by splork » (Master)

i guess i'm just sick of seeing so many linux distributions.

The only type of distro that I haven't noticed but would still love to see is one that dumps the RPM and DEB formats and relies solely on a derivative of the *BSD ports system.

FUD about DJB-ware, posted 13 Nov 2001 at 05:21 UTC by FarcePest » (Journeyer)

jbuck wrote:

Dan Bernstein writes outstanding software, but his insistence on his own licensing terms mean that a distributor cannot support his software, because it's not legal to distribute patches.
This is total baloney. www.qmail.org and www.tinydns.org are almost nothing but patches. You can distribute all the patches you want. You can also distribute binaries. You can also distribute a package that has the original source tarball and separate patches -- several people do this, myself included (SRPMS, but also Debian source packages are also available).

What you can't do is distribute patched binary packages. Dan's non-license is here. But that's a different issue.

Something really different, posted 19 Nov 2001 at 21:06 UTC by pliant » (Master)

If you want something really different in Linux distributions areas, then just look at FullPliant: it uses Linux kernel, but all high level services are written using the Pliant language: as efficient as C, but much higher level when required, so that all applications can be short enough so that you can really read the code.

New Advogato Features

New HTML Parser: The long-awaited libxml2 based HTML parser code is live. It needs further work but already handles most markup better than the original parser.

Keep up with the latest Advogato features by reading the Advogato status blog.

If you're a C programmer with some spare time, take a look at the mod_virgule project page and help us with one of the tasks on the ToDo list!

Share this page