Dear Mr. Patrakov, you seem to like Debian very much. Maybe I will try it too after I builded my LFS and found that it does not satisfy me.
If you already tried to do LFS with an analogous modem then you will probably know the advantages of a LiveCD on which all the stuff is gathered so that you can download it in some minutes at anybody else, who has fast internet. I know there are binary distros I could use as host. But why should I first download any binary distro and then all the LFS packages if I could download the LFS LiveCD and get all at once? Maybe if I had already installed Debian this would make sense, but I have not. And there is still the question of speed. You tried Debian in a low-spec-VM. I do not know nothing about VMs, because I never needed it. Did you slow down CPU, BUS and the HDD, too? Did you switch off MMX? Did you run OpenOffice on it? Did it work well? If yes, Debian has to be a very good distro. But your initial question was not: "Is there any distro which could be used instead of the LiveCD" but "Is the LiveCD needed?" what I understood in the meaning of "useful" and aswered with yes. Where I found the information about the LiveCD as kind of reference system I do not know anymore. I read pretty much about LFS last months. I tried to find it today, but without success. I understand your point and agree: it would be better if I were wrong here. If I find it later I will send you the link. Concerning the package manager I read about some people who use LFS as their main system and can live without it. Others wrote their own scripts to handle the packages or took the package managers of other distros. Especially portage seems to be quite popular. But this is off topic, I think. M. Miehe. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/livecd FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
