Before the distro development can progress to any significant form, we have to be on the same level with our understanding of the goals for the project, and how we're going to get there.

What is assumed/given:
-This distro will be Linux based - not BSD based.
-This distro will be x64_64 multilib and i686.
-Bash will not be the default shell
-Systemd will not be used

What I personally would like to see:
-Rolling release
-Both stable, and bleeding repos
-Default Btrfs install
-Default ZSH

What has been brought up on IRC:
-Default ZFS install
-Pkgsrc package manager
-Stable release, stable packages, and *long term releases*
-Other things

I know that I am missing a lot of things that have been brought up in the IRC at points, even just in passing, so if you have an idea, please, share it. Once we can agree on a set of absolutes, further development (and official development) can begin.

We're going to need to decide between Btrfs and ZFS. Other than that, things look good.

What are we going to do about the init system, then? SysV, OpenRC, busybox, roll our own? Personally I like OpenRC (or anything BSD-style, to be honest).

I'm pretty interested in using Busybox, but I'm open to anything (that's not systemd). Rolling out our own is an interesting concept, but I think we should save that project for another time.

So what can I do to help?

i can into C++, python, and powerline almost anything.

Doubt I can contribute much on the coding side, but if you guys want splash screens or any other graphics work done, let me know. I'd be happy to help.
I did the splash and a few logos for ArchBSD back in the day.

How will the maintenance of packages go?

I would love OpenRC personally.

.................

If you can make an argument for it, I'm open to the idea.

We should have a separate section for all things having to do with UnixHub Linux.

I found these the other day:

http://git.2f30.org/sinit/
http://git.2f30.org/fs/

Pretty simple as an init system. Also, it leaves room for any daemon manager you want.

why not UHnix?

you know, kinda like Unix. but with an H. that's silent.

(03-03-2014, 10:01 PM)funriz Wrote: why not UHnix?

you know, kinda like Unix. but with an H. that's silent.

I like it, how about a revote?

I'm all for UHnix.

That's a nice idea. But then again that doesn't make much sense for a Linuhx distro. That's just going to confuse everybody.

Hubnix is also one viable alternative.

if we're trying to steer clear from *nix:

maybe just: Uhub Linux? Hubuntu? (UHubuntu) <-- lol
though i am almost positive from being here long enough, you guys won't like anything *buntu.

unixhub linux, uhl for short

UH/Linux
UH + Linux

Lin-uhx.

- We should use git for version control
- "Hux" could be the mascot's name. "Neo" is another option
- I would rather a BSD base rather than a Linux base (but it seems we have already decided on this one)

I would like to suggest using BFS and BFQ patches in the kernel we end up using. I really can't imagine going back to mainline.

(04-03-2014, 11:08 AM)berk Wrote: - We should use git for version control

Good point. I think everybody just took that for granted, thanks for actually writing it down.

http://suckless.org/rocks
http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/

Some of the things here are stuff we should really stick to.

UHL , sounds like a hockey league eh.


GNU/Linux is not UNIX , or even have UNIX roots.

HubLinux is another choice... You may create recursive name (i like recursive names)

Im using slackware/slax so init system is bsd-ish. I like the way rc scripts, and init system... Its easy and basic. Not a fan of debian/ubuntu like init system (whatever they use)

I think just do and it works logic is good. You just create script and it works, you just start X and it works too... You just press power and it boots, you just close lid it sleeps... (Also you can change all by editing scripts and you can do whatever you want / even ejecting dvd by closing lid)

I would like to learn why we are not going for a BSD base, please. It looked like a direct assumption, judging from the OP.

Well, for one, this is a desktop distro, or at least, aimed at desktops, so a broad range of hardware support, and large community of developers is key. BSD simply can't provide the community of developers that GNU/Linux can.

OpenBSD and NetBSD have little support for newer Nvidia cards, and FreeBSD only supports them with a binary driver. That's the problem with using a BSD base for a desktop OS, you exclude most people with Nvidia cards. Unless someone ports Nouveau, we'd be better off with Linux.

I like BSD as much as the next guy, but I also have a few laptops with Nvidia cards, and I'm sure lots of people here do, too.

Unless we want to help the BSDs with porting Nouveau...

I thought the Linux base was already decided, using the BSD base just leaves out too large of a crowd. It's UH's first Distro, support is something it WILL NEED.

^ What Mafia said.

I would like a default ZFS just because i feel like ZFS isn't a common filesystem at least for linux and it'll be something a lot of the bsd users will enjoy so basically it's the best of two worlds.

(08-03-2014, 02:24 AM)DotDev Wrote: ^ What Mafia said.

I would like a default ZFS just because i feel like ZFS isn't a common filesystem at least for linux and it'll be something a lot of the bsd users will enjoy so basically it's the best of two worlds.

Damn right, I also was gonna comment on that. I used ZFS for the first time recently when I switched one of my laptops to FreeBSD. It's nice.