Posting style (Was Re: [LINUX_Newbies] Re: Installation)
- On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 01:53:00PM -0000, Pascal wrote:
> --- In LINUX_Newbies@yahoogroups.com, dvdpst <dvdposton@...> wrote:This particular list has more or less given up on proper posting style, as
> > Not all Linux can go on older machines. If you are looking for an Linux to
> > put on an pre 90s machine. Try looking at Puppy Linux. It can run on an
> > machine with 128 mb or less. There are others too. I have Puppy running on
> > an 186 with 128 mb ram.
> Did I miss something along the way? I always thought replying to threads on mailinglists is incompatible with top-posting. I do not mean to be pussy about that issue, but I agree that it is easier to read/understand. Too much text in the original message to quote it all? Cut it out in the response and put [snip] instead as a placeholder.
everytime it's brought it, it goes to a long, usually nasty, thread.
As this is a newbies list, even those of us who have been around for awhile
have pretty much decided not to get involved with it.
Yes, please do trim and use inline posting. I think many of us simply
don't have the time (or perhaps the inclination) to wade through top
posted, non trimmed questions, so the people who post that way may not get answers from
many here--but there are other kinder people who will answer those emails
At any rate, as far as I know, this list doesn't try to enforce any posting
style. On the Linux list, however, it's much stricter, and improperly
posted messages may be corrected once by a moderator if they have time,
with a note as to what is wrong and some links to proper formatting, or
just left in queue to eventually be automatically deleted. Harsh, but the
list is a lot easier to read. :)
PGP keyID EB3467D6
( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6
- --- In LINUX_Newbies@yahoogroups.com, Scott <scottro@...> wrote:
>Just because people are developing code doesn't mean that anyone is stuck with running those programs. The beauty of Linux is that it is pretty end user configurable. Distributions of Linux should be considered starting points, that are customized for use. With a distribution I feel one is only buying into a package management scheme, and a software repository, to some extent.
> I'm a bit puzzled by that statement as well. I am also wondering if the
> quoting got messed up on this list, as it frequently does, because,
> especially for a desktop machine that isn't doing that much, I wouldn't
> have more than one swap partition. Usually, as I run fairly minimal
> desktops, I never have more than 1 GB of swap, save on servers, but that's
> a different thing. Yes, Linux only requires one swap partition, and you
> could, in a pinch, even get by without that--depending upon what you're
> doing--if you never do anything memory intensive, then you might be able to
> do without it.
> HOWEVER--as far as it being lighter on resources, most Linux developers
> these days are like their Windows and Apple counterparts, and sad to say,
> running Fedora requires more resources than Windows XP (though not more
> than Windows 7). Fedora won't do a GUI install if you have less than 512MB
> of RAM, and RH has crippled the text install.
> However, there are other versions of Linux, including Debian and Slackware,
> and probably Ubuntu minimal, that still run on low resource machines.
> Scott Robbins
I know I like to personalize my systems to suit my desires. This system for instance I installed with a Debian net image but since then I have been adding plenty to it that Debian does not offer. All of the things I use the most in fact.