Porteus linux on the net or on the waves of the web

[Ahau]

The article is also from June.

Aside from the mischaracterization of who 'runs' or 'owns' the project, I think most of the negative comments were more subjective than factually wrong. When 1.0 came out in June, PPM didn't have very many modules in the repo, and that seemed to be the main problem the author had. I think the 1.1 release, with the rewritten PPM (with more modules in the repo plus auto-installation of third party packages) will largely address the downsides he presented.

[Hamza]

The initial author is fanthom..He started Slax Remix, and Slax Remix become Porteus.
We are all contributing to Porteus, Porteus is not owned by someone, that is why Linux exist!
Everyone can contribute to Porteus as he want.

Initial Author != Owner

Cheers

[brokenman]

[ fanthom != "owner" ] && porteus=community || rm brokenman-comment

I get it now ... but i still bow down ... humbled.

[francois]

As of today november 8 th, porteus ranks 70 th, just after open clonezilla, antix, dreamlinux, openbsd and pureos:
http://distrowatch.com/

[wread]

I opened the above link and now we are ranking 64. Seven places up in 60 days; last year, at this date, we were not there at all.
If we keep this upward rate in 360 days we will be 64 - 6*7 = 22. Not that bad!

Regards!

EDIT: Remember we do not give payolas! (=a "Caribbean" word)

[Ahau]

There's a review of Porteus 1.1 here: http://linuxreview.ir/1390/10/porteus-1-1-revie/

It's in Farsi (?), however, so it's a little tough for me to read

Google translate helps a bit, though it seems to miss some of the characters:
http://translate.google.com/translate?h ... md%3Dimvns

Seems generally positive One issue they had was with the installer -- I believe they had already created a folder on their target drive called 'porteus', and that stopped the installer from copying the base files to the device. Might be one to address for version 2.0

[brokenman]

Thanks Ahau. Very thorough review and it seemed quite positive. The reviewers obviously know their way around linux and found the installation problem. I'll look at a way around this as it seems logical that one would create a directory called 'porteus' in which to place our OS.

[brokenman]

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Porteus- ... 5325.shtml

[Ahau]

Just came across this video review of V1.1 32-bit: http://linuxspatry.blogspot.com/2012/02 ... based.html

Seems positive, though I havent listened to the whole thing just yet, since I'm presently at work.

[Hamza]

Where is the 64-bit review ??

[wread]

This review is great! Our Porius is going to get glorious!

[brokenman]

Very positive although he was booting in a virtual environment which appeared to boot a little slow. He was nice enough to cut the video when logging into LXDE from KDE which i seem to have borked in that release. Overall ... 2 thumbs up. Very nice.

[francois]

Porteus doing fine at rank 48 at distrowatch, just after archbang, Crunchbang, kubuntu, salix... . From week to week the distribution is climbing slowly, but surely.

[Ahau]

Here's a review I found on 1.2 RC1:

http://all-things-linux.blogspot.com/20 ... linux.html

[francois]

This is a quite exhaustive review of porteus. The conclusion is short and ordinary, it does not fit the review. However, what could we learn from it?

Posted after 13 hours 8 minutes 14 seconds:
And as stated, on the above mentioned link by fanthom in a commentary to the review: rc 1.2 is kind of in a nude state. The author should expect a lot more garnments when 1.2 will be released. At least, that is what I understand of fanthom's comment. I don't know if the author of the review understood that though.