Suggestion to Klaus Knopper: release combined 32- and 64-bit base for remastering

[utu]

...Pre-selected overlay additions: game, programming, education, and so on to "expand the capabilities" for those who need....

I know this is a nice feature of Porteus, but if Knoppix were to have its own capability to generate overlays, then everyone might define their own overlays. For example, If I had a Baseline LiveCD as I defined, then with Synaptic I'd temporarily add IceWeasel, LibreOffice, and Geany and a few fiddleware settings temporarily to my persistence file and then use the new added capability to roll this into my own unique Knoppix1 overlay.

I am specifically NOT advocating pre-selected sets of overlays, but rather the ablilty to make our own unique overlays from a common,
minimalist Baseline. Agreeing on a Baseline is in itself a hard enough task, there being infinite possibilities.

[dwstarke]

I appreciate the thought that has gone into this, and I would add my voice to those who see the utility of a minimalist knoppix. My only additional suggestion is to modularize the desktop as well.

The real value inherent in knoppix lends itself to this kind of modularity (squashfs vs cloop notwithstanding). What is the memory overhead for adding cloops?

As far as standard vs roll-your-own modules, I think that those who made cleverly implemented RYO modules could make them available to others. In other words the best of both (and satisfying the anarchist in me, no rules).

[utu]

...cleverly implemented RYO modules..

If we have Synaptic and a mkisofs utility in the Baseline, we can make our own unique modules.
We needn't ask Klaus K to do what we can easily do ourselves.

In regards to the overhead for increase in the number of cloops, I've heard the problem is
that if eight aren't enough, the next choice is sixteen. If so, whatever the overhead is now,
it doubles this overhead if you want more cloops than eight.

[fredvej]

utu, I agree that a 32 bit basic Knoppix without IceWeasel, LibreOffice and Gimp would be a very useful base for customizing, and hopefully it won't cost Klaus Knopper much extra work. We must keep his build proces in mind, it's not divided into stages as I suggested.

Regarding adding software on the fly, have you experimented with the update feature as described in knoppix-cheatcodes.txt ? "If you place an update*.zip or update*tar.gz file on the medium holding the KNOPPIX data, it will be unpacked onto the overlayed filesystem before starting "init", thus allowing quick reconfiguration of the system."

[utu]

@fredvej
1. Thanks, Freddy, for starting this nice thread. We're seeing a nice interesting
interaction among forum members here as a result.
2. I've used the two update features on occasion in the past as a means of preserving
my persistence file material which I am in the habit of catasrophically over-writing
on occasion. However, it is so easy to package, compact and save a snapshot of
persistence with a mkisofs utility, I currently prefer that approach.

@capricorny
1. Greetings, nice to hear from you. I hope you'll post more details of just how you
manage your Knoppix re-masterings.
2. My op ed earlier was slanted toward asking a minimum of Klaus K, trying to stay
within what I think his own framework for producing Knoppix might be.
Other Linux distros have their own minimal configuration from which to build up one's
own tailor-made system. KK could easily dump a 'baseline' iso with very little
additional effort.
3. I think you and I may represent two extremes in using Knoppix. I prefer a mininal
configuration, and like to build up my small Knoppix from overlays. You seem to represent
the 'power user' and can and do tackle larger modifications of Knoppix to get what you
want. One size to begin or end with clearly wont suit both of us.
4. I concur that Klaus K would much prefer a good working example of code for any
suggested improvement of Knoppix. Gilles' contributions to init show how effective this
approach can be.

[Capricorny]

1.... I hope you'll post more details of just how you
manage your Knoppix re-masterings.
2. My op ed earlier was slanted toward asking a minimum of Klaus K, trying to stay
within what I think his own framework for producing Knoppix might be.
Other Linux distros have their own minimal configuration from which to build up one's
own tailor-made system. KK could easily dump a 'baseline' iso with very little
additional effort.
3. I think you and I may represent two extremes in using Knoppix. I prefer a mininal
configuration, and like to build up my small Knoppix from overlays. You seem to represent
the 'power user' and can and do tackle larger modifications of Knoppix to get what you
want. One size to begin or end with clearly wont suit both of us.
4. I concur that Klaus K would much prefer a good working example of code for any
suggested improvement of Knoppix. Gilles' contributions to init show how effective this
approach can be.

1. I have already posted the scripts&essential details, but I will update it on the next round of remastering. I dropped 7.2 because of kernel incompatibilities with VMware Workstation 8.X - I didn't want to upgrade WS8 then.
2. I don't completely agree with the opinion that a minimal Knoppix is such a simple task - all the extra issues that have been with CD versions over time clearly demonstrate something else, I think. But of course, something way smaller that the DVD stuffing will suffice. What is needed, is a "knxbootstrap" package as an expanded derivative of debootstrap - and I really wish someone would look into it. Although non-trivial, it shouldn't be that hard to do.
3. I'm not so sure that the same starting point won't work for us - I think it very well could. In fact, I would far prefer starting with something smaller, than running the risky purging business I have to do now, to wipe out some 1-2 GB of unneeded packages. I have totally given up projects to produce a more minimalist Knoppix by extensive purging - always end up with system crashes because the deb package dependencies handling is so far from foolproof.
4. The best way to influence KK is probably to make real improvements that still stay within his "paradigm". Creating auxiliary deb packages could be a way.

[utu]

I don't completely agree with the opinion that a minimal Knoppix is such a simple task .

I only mean it seems like it will be difficult for everyone to agree on what constitures some optimal minimum.
For example, PCLinuxOS and Porteus come with some real small minimal configs, but I always want LibreOffice, Geany and Flash,
even in my most minimal configuration. I can give up gimp and virtualbox, since I don't use them much. I'm sure everyone has
their own mix of 'standard' programs. Klaus K's 32-bit CD image comes awfully close for me.

[utu]

. The best way to influence KK is probably to make real improvements that still stay within his "paradigm". Creating auxiliary deb packages could be a way.

I agree in principal. My impression is that KK may accept improvements (code) word-for-word from the pros among us,
but will quite likely reword worthy contributions from those of us less l'arned in the trade. I expect some working script
will usually suffice to get his attention. That is, I don't think one needs go as far as deb packaging if you are onto a good idea.