A message from Bruce Richardson <itsbruce@netscape.net>
on uk.comp.os.linux, generated this thread on mulinux mailing-list
==================================================================


From: Bruce Richardson <itsbruce@netscape.net>
Subject: [itsbruce@netscape.net: Small Linux (was Re: Linux on 286)]
Subject: Small Linux (was Re: Linux on 286)
From: Bruce Richardson <itsbruce@netscape.net>
Date: 1999/11/22
Newsgroups: uk.comp.os.linux

Silvery wrote:
> Anyhoo, this is way OT, so I'll shut up now. Well, apart to ask if anyone
> knows of a distro that can set up modems and net cards easily, provide a
> GUI, _and_ fit (including swap) on a 200meg (about 177 fomatted) drive?

Hi mate,

If you have a network card handy (and another machine with cd-rom at the
other end) or can fit a CD-Rom, most can be cut down to squeeze in.  If
you don't, then Debian is the only respectable distro I know that does a
floppy-install.

I spent the weekend shoe-horning Linux into a Toshiba 1910 (486/33, 4mb
ram, 200mb HD).  Not having a pcmcia network card handy, (or a copy of
Debian) I downloaded muLinux - http://sunsite.auc.dk/mulinux/ - and used
that.  muLinux is actually one of those Linux on a floppy jobs (with 3
extra "tools" floppies with extra tools, GCC and X11 on them).  By
default it expects to run off the floppy (well, off a ramdisk actually)
using a loop file on a DOS Hard disk for swap but I repartitioned and
reformatted the hard disk as EXT2, transferred the contents of the
floppies, did a little editing of inittab etc, ran lilo and that was
it.  Because the system is designed to run from a 2mb ramdisk, it finds
the 200 mb disk space (minus the 16mb swap) very roomy indeed and it's
pretty much a full  single-workstation Linux (if libc5 based) - what
isn't there I can add with GCC.  The only niggle is that the guy who put
it together is Italian and the system messages are in slightly fractured
English ("The user wants the file X" means "File X is missing") so it's
all a bit "Linux as she is spoke".

I'd recommend it as a way of learning more about the basics of how a
Linux system fits together - I thought I knew plenty about inittab and
runlevels but writing my own init-scripts taught me a lot.

muLinux isn't the only small Linux out there, you can find a pretty
comprehensive list at http://www.toms.net/rb/ (worth checking out just
for tomsrtbt), several of which can be converted into small HD
installations (at least one is based on Debian 2.1).

HTH

--

Bruce


(end of original message)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------


From: Kochenburger Andreas <Andreas.Kochenburger@khe.siemens.de>
To: mulinux@sunsite.auc.dk
Subject: AW: [itsbruce@netscape.net: Small Linux (was Re: Linux on 286)]
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 12:44:35 +0100

With all due respect, Bruce said a lot of good things about mulinux.
And I would prefer a better English, too. With Latin and Esperanto =
having
disappeared, English is the "lingua franca" nowadays, whether we like
American culture or not.

Michele, please don't go into a defense position but take it as a =
feedback
from an else satisfied user, asking for improvement.

Perhaps someone, who is "native English speaker" (I am not), could =
volunteer
to assist in making messages and other text precise and clear?

I know from our international business how important it is to provide a =
good
user interface _WITH_ attractiveness, sometimes psychological. And we
want mulinux not just to _BE_ but to _INTERACT_ in a professional not
hobbyistic
way, don't we?

Andreas

From: Kochenburger Andreas <Andreas.Kochenburger@khe.siemens.de>
To: mulinux@sunsite.auc.dk
Subject: AW: AW: [itsbruce@netscape.net: Small Linux

I am not Michele but I did understand Bruce's posting not
the way you do: he is _not_ asking for improvement.
He just complains about the bad english but doesn't tell his
opinion to Michele (but to the uk.. newsgroup) nor does he
offer his help (being a native-speaker).
....<snippety snip all the rest>

Please calm down. Even if Bruce was brute (that one rhymes ;-) )
it does not make oneself a fool to accept that even fools can
say true things now and then. And a feedback is a feedback,
that's all, no matter if it is wrapped beautifully or tastelessly.
(Perhaps Bruce's girlfriend just ran away when he made his posting;
but that does not make Bruce necessarily a bad guy and his feedback
without value).
Andreas

From: "Rik Hughes" <rik@breathemail.net>
To: <mulinux@sunsite.auc.dk>
Subject: Re: [itsbruce@netscape.net: Small Linux (was Re: Linux on 286)]


----- Original Message -----
From: Kochenburger Andreas <Andreas.Kochenburger@khe.siemens.de>
To: <mulinux@sunsite.auc.dk>
Sent: Friday, November 26, 1999 11:44 AM
Subject: AW: [itsbruce@netscape.net: Small Linux (was Re: Linux on 286)]


> With all due respect, Bruce said a lot of good things about mulinux.
> And I would prefer a better English, too. With Latin and Esperanto having
> disappeared, English is the "lingua franca" nowadays, whether we like
> American culture or not.

Since when did English come from America! As a colonnial Englishman I have
to object, but more importantly as a Welshman, I have to object to the
'American Culture' only speaking English, like the Welsh only speak Welsh
;-(.

> Michele, please don't go into a defense position but take it as a feedback
> from an else satisfied user, asking for improvement.
>
> Perhaps someone, who is "native English speaker" (I am not), could
volunteer
> to assist in making messages and other text precise and clear?

Any problems send them to me, I will do the utmost to help.

Rik

rik@breathemail.net
http://welcome.to/bitsnpcs

From: Massimo Pilolli <maxpilolli@user.ats.it>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.36 i686)
To: mulinux@sunsite.auc.dk
Subject: Re: [itsbruce@netscape.net: Small Linux (was Re: Linux on 286)]

Ehi, guys!

Why are you so excited? I don't think Bruce was really so unkind.
Yes, he could have been very kind and offer his help, but we
cannot kill him for not having done this. Anyway, he said many
positive things about muLinux, and I suggest to positively
consider even the (few) negative ones as a very useful feedback.

Let's go on with Rik's proposal.

Ciao,
Max

From: winsor <winsor@wi.net>
Subject: Re: AW: [itsbruce@netscape.net: Small Linux (was Re: Linux on 286)]
References: <8F58BF719CD3D01192D8006097297706013103C8@kher087a.khe.siemens.de>

I'm sorry But I wouldn't change the messages and MOTD "one iota".
This gives character and personality to MuLinux and to an extant, a
degree of creativity and humor not usually associated with system
programming.
In many senses when one fires up MuLinux that person KNOWS of the
country of origin.....and this is good......
And it certainly beats another old "mini-linux" that came configured for
a portuguese keymap and  help docs that said "buy a book on
Linux"....that was fun to learn on*LOL*

Just my ramblings from an idyll mynd,
signed
winsor

From: Daniel Brooks <brooksd@milwaukee.tec.wi.us>
To: "mulinux@sunsite.auc.dk" <mulinux@sunsite.auc.dk>
Subject: Re: Re: AW: [itsbruce@netscape.net: Small Linux

At 11/26/99 12:13:00 PM, you wrote:
>I cannot speak for 'us', I can only tell you my own private
>point of view: I like muLinux and I have no problem with it
>containing several english spelling errors.

Actually, I like the "fractured" English. It is one of the many
things that give muLinux it's charm.

Daniel Brooks
From: "Alfie Costa" <agcosta@gis.net>
To: quisque@tin.it
Subject: Cosmopolitan style versus Rustic style

On 26 Nov 99, at 21:28, Michele Andreoli <mulinux@sunsite.auc.dk> wrote:

> On the other hand, I can't understand why anyone, mother tongue,
> never offers itself for a right translation of muLinux messages, in the
> way they may seems less rustic and more professional. 
> A sort of extreme discretion and/or prudence v. the author?

Good Morning,

Prudence is one reason, people worry that programming is difficult enough; 
besides, programmers can be surprisingly sensitive about their writing.  Sort 
of like that Monty Python restaurant skit where a waiter, manager and cook all 
go insane after a customer requests a cleaner fork.  

Another reason,  the main reason I think, is that your users may dread that  
the cure might be worse than the disease...  

Most user manuals are professionally written to make a program look better than 
it is.  Often a program won't be as well written or edited as its manual -- 
which doesn't mention all the bugs, or conceals or distracts one's attention 
from them.  The poor user is lulled into a sense of inflated confidence and 
false security, and later may grow disgusted when they find out how things are. 

MuLinux doesn't fool the user with a slick manual, so instead of being shocked 
at what doesn't work, the user is expecting trouble.  This leads to 
the pleasant discovery that muLinux works better than one expects it to.

A native speaker of a particular language isn't automatically a good writer. 
The present generation of american-style user manuals are grim and formal, full 
of jargon and pretension; such evils make your italian humor and 
straightforwardness that much more refreshing.  

Summing up, you're right when you say it can't hurt to fix a few misspellings 
or errors of wording, but please don't permit anyone to "correct" your style to 
the point of making it fashionably unreadable. 

Hope this helps...

