Talk:Damn Small Linux

message: Just updated v. 3.1 to 3.2, but programs (I think) need to be updated Chickenjohn 03:04, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Updated release dates

message: I've been seeing a lot of bloat on this article recently. I'd like to point out that wiki is not a forum for promoting your favorite "brand" of linux.
Also, I edited the wording of the one sentence that said "Currently (site name I forgot) has over 200 programs, I added a specific date, so that the article ages a bit easier.
*Seconded on spam. This article sounds more like advocacy than the NPOV the wikipedia holds for. I call for someone to tidy this up.
*Thirded, I'm adding . Reasons include the presence of many subjective terms, including :
**"It is ideal for use on older x86 computers due to its low memory requirements and small size (50 MiB), and is noted for its compactness and robustness."
***Fixed.--Chealer 17:05, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: --Chealer 08:17, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spammy edits... 

message: A list of the minimal hardware requirements (RAM size, etc.) would be nice—thanks! Maikel 19:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minimal Requirements? 

message: The latest edit by Thumperward changing date formats has an edit summary asking to "see talk on GNU GRUB, User_talk:Chealer". I'm reverting this, but in case Thumperward's edit was justified, explain what should be seen on these pages related to the change.--Chealer 18:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date formats 

message: The latest edit by Thumperward changing "GNU/Linux" for "Linux" when talking about GNU/Linux has an edit summary asking to "see consensus on Linux for no GNU/everywhere". I'm reverting this, but in case Thumperward's edit was justified, point to where Linux has such a consensus.--Chealer 18:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linux rather than GNU/Linux 

message: Changed version from 3.4 to 3.4.1 as of sept 5th, 2007. Also stated that there is a 4.0 Release Candidate available. Programs may need to be updated. (I dont think program version numbers really need to be added in the future.)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aadster (talk • contribs) 02:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just updating version numbers... 

message: 3.4.3 is released now, soon to be followed by 4.0 in, according to the developers, about 2 weeks. I don't think there's any new programs but maybe I missed something.
EDIT: Also fixed up the releases; those 3 updates of 3.4 (.1, .2, .3) are now added to the release list. Ekkusu 18:32, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing to 3.4.3 

message: Once APT is enabled, the user can install packages from Debian's 'Woody' repository.
Seriously? With Lenny almost out the door, Woody, from 2002, is three releases old and has been completely unsupported for over two years. If this is true, the DSL entry should include a note explaining the severe obsolesce and questionable viability of these packages or mention of APT functionality should be removed from the article because Woody compatibility is not notable. Whelkman (talk) 16:21, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Debian Woody? 

message: Did they delete the DSL wiki?
http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
Perhaps the question is slightly on topic, since a deleting of the wiki could maybe indicate something (good or bad) about what's happening with DSL lately. --95.34.5.61 (talk) 02:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/wiki/ All I had to do was clip your link. Are you getting old?
Weatherlawyer (talk) 11:51, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiki (somewhat off topic question...) 

message: Maybe it's just me, but this article seems like an advertisement for DSL...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.88.110.235 (talk) 22:46, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Idiot couldn't sign his name and thinks the article is an advert. :~)
Weatherlawyer (talk) 11:56, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ad? 

message: "Due to its small amount of required RAM , it is often  used in virtual machines" , how was anybody supposed to cit it?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.217.111.234 (talk) 18:21, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation for a extremely cannot-cit-it line? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Damn Small Linux. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100527221513/http://www.itreviews.co.uk/software/s682.htm to http://www.itreviews.co.uk/software/s682.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:55, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The website says "Coming soon: DSL 2024!" Given this, would this still be considered "abandoned"? -- 2600:1700:1950:9B40:FCDD:9EEE:A591:8E09 (talk) 03:51, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It'd be good to see an update to DSL, but if the parameter is going to be updated to "Current" it should have a current release, at the moment it's a vague single sentence on the distro's website, which by itself I don't think is enough to go on quite yet. - Aoidh (talk) 08:34, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  There may or may not be something this year 

message: Some of which relate to the newest version. I was also addressing a lot of Wiki issues that are declared in the Hidden tags below the article. FullScale4Me (talk) 02:59, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  I'm doing a minor cleanup