@drmozes - contributing to the public domain
by Exaga from LinuxQuestions.org on (#6HX4A)
Let's do this here, and leave other people's threads intact. ;)
Quote:
Your efforts are your own, and mine are my own. I do not ever publicly question any of your work or contradict anything you say or do. Please afford me the same latitude.
SARPi does not use the mainline kernel source. It uses the Raspberry Pi Linux source and _defconfig that is optimised for the devices on which it runs. I've come to realise that this is a prudent choice, even though it's not in-line with the Linux purist mentality, as the creators of the hardware should know best (or at least one assumes that they should). Right?
I perpetually support and encourage users to install and run official Slackware software over my own. I do not purposely try to supplant or undermine any of your work or efforts in any way. I just let you get on with it. I respectfully request that you offer me the same latitude.
While declaring that you have concerns when considering reports about Kernels not undergoing thorough testing before deployment, which kernels are you referring to? If they are SARPi kernels then I need to see these reports in order to address them. Please forward any reports to me, to my usual email, so that I may consider and address them accordingly. I've not personally received any SARPi kernel complaints for quite a long time (i.e. years).
I've added one line in bold text near the top of the homepage on the SARPi website: "NB: The SARPi Project supports Slackware but is not officially supported by Slackware. For all officially supported Slackware software please check out arm.slackware.com." That's all for now. I do not welcome being told how I should run my own community project or what it must contain to be acceptable by other people's standards. Unless it is fundamentally working against Slackware, which is isn't, and never has been, or will be.
While I try to keep an open mind on all things Linux community related, I care little about the state of the SARPi Project in the grand scheme of things, as it's quite accurate, fit for purpose, working as intended, and mostly for my own benefit and pleasure. If there's anything about the website's information or software that is not to people's liking, that's unfortunate. But they could always trying asking nicely for me to change/add/delete something instead of mounting an attack on its veracity or integrity. It's not the done thing or best way these days. People might do themselves proud to remember and consider these things. Open mind or not, as the case may be.
I look forward to receiving your reports. Thank you for your time.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by drmozes(Post 6477154)Our efforts are dedicated to contributing to the public domain, with a specific focus on optimising the presentation of Slackware on the ARM platform. The primary goal is to create a seamless and efficient experience. Our broader intention is to incorporate any enhancements made into the Slackware x86 platform. Over the past few years, a substantial investment of thousands of hours has been made in this pursuit. Unfortunately, SARPi's current presentation does not adequately showcase these contributions, as detailed in my earlier response. As you well know, people frequently overlook details, and SARPi is often mistakenly regarded as the official Slackware. Concerns arise when considering reports about Kernels not undergoing thorough testing before deployment. This issue raises alarms for me as the Kernel is a critical OS component and must be tested. It's imperative to address this, especially when SARPi identifies itself as "Slackware AArch64 on the Raspberry Pi", without making reference to the official presentation and documentation. Aligning with and acknowledging the official support is crucial for maintaining credibility and ensuring a reliable user experience. Enhancing SARPi's user experience can be achieved with a few straightforward adjustments. One suggestion is to construct the RPi Kernel directly from the build script within the Slackware ARM source tree. Additionally, there is potential to eventually replicate the All in One Installer. Please consider these recommendations with an open mind. It's important to note that SARPi is a commendable project, and I sincerely appreciate the considerable efforts you've invested. Your contributions are valued, and I hope to see the project continue to thrive. Cheers s. |
SARPi does not use the mainline kernel source. It uses the Raspberry Pi Linux source and _defconfig that is optimised for the devices on which it runs. I've come to realise that this is a prudent choice, even though it's not in-line with the Linux purist mentality, as the creators of the hardware should know best (or at least one assumes that they should). Right?
I perpetually support and encourage users to install and run official Slackware software over my own. I do not purposely try to supplant or undermine any of your work or efforts in any way. I just let you get on with it. I respectfully request that you offer me the same latitude.
While declaring that you have concerns when considering reports about Kernels not undergoing thorough testing before deployment, which kernels are you referring to? If they are SARPi kernels then I need to see these reports in order to address them. Please forward any reports to me, to my usual email, so that I may consider and address them accordingly. I've not personally received any SARPi kernel complaints for quite a long time (i.e. years).
I've added one line in bold text near the top of the homepage on the SARPi website: "NB: The SARPi Project supports Slackware but is not officially supported by Slackware. For all officially supported Slackware software please check out arm.slackware.com." That's all for now. I do not welcome being told how I should run my own community project or what it must contain to be acceptable by other people's standards. Unless it is fundamentally working against Slackware, which is isn't, and never has been, or will be.
While I try to keep an open mind on all things Linux community related, I care little about the state of the SARPi Project in the grand scheme of things, as it's quite accurate, fit for purpose, working as intended, and mostly for my own benefit and pleasure. If there's anything about the website's information or software that is not to people's liking, that's unfortunate. But they could always trying asking nicely for me to change/add/delete something instead of mounting an attack on its veracity or integrity. It's not the done thing or best way these days. People might do themselves proud to remember and consider these things. Open mind or not, as the case may be.
I look forward to receiving your reports. Thank you for your time.