On Thursday, Aug 21, 2003, at 18:09 Asia/Jerusalem, Bill Rugolsky Jr. wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 09:38:09AM -0400, Jef Spaleta wrote:
File it as a bug! Or maybe you want to step up and be part of a worthwhile discussion as to re-working of the existing minimal install option. Since it seems its really a more a matter of how the packages are grouped and which groups a minimal install actually installs..its more a policy issue than an expert coding issue. This seems like something we can have a nice lovely little community discussion about...instead of just poking repeatedly at the anaconda maintainer to remove this one package here...or this one other package..or maybe add this one package to minimal. And its certainly a better idea to fix the current minimal install offering than adding another minimal minimal layer beyond the "broken" minimal.
http://www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-beta-list/2003-July/msg00569.html
This discussion always tends to conflate different notions of "minimal".
The question is "minimal" w.r.t what criterion? Is it the bare list of packages necessary to get to a login prompt on a standalone machine? Is it a networked host? Is documentation included? Manpages? Info files? /usr/share/doc?
I'd like to see a "bootstrap configuration" that installs enough that I can install more using up2date or yum. That generally means "basic networking (and firewalling)" + any specifics needed to get my host connected to my network or ISP (i.e., ppp, dhcp, etc.).
A bootstrap configuration would be nice, but I dont think it would be for anaconda proper. Maybe there needs to be something like "linux bootstrap". We need to work or this further.
--Jack