On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Nils Philippsen wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-01-22 at 20:03 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
>
> > No it doesnt. I made my argument with detailed rationale on why
> > I believe it is not useful in general cases. If you disagree
> > with me, feel free to do so but I would like to hear a detailed
> > set of use cases that make it a convincing enough argument for
> > Anaconda to support it for end users apart from Kickstart
> > capability.
> What most people complain about here is AFAICS that we
completely
> removed (instead of just hid) an option they valued and that was a
> well tested (by them), supposedly no-brainer sort of code path,
> very much unlikely to give any problems down the road.
You are thinking about this from the development perspective. The
code base is a no brainer but from the support perspective the
number of issues that a everything installation has caused is
innumerous. Specifically in Fedora, try doing a everythings
installation of FC4 and try running yum update. Watch GFS module
packages fail.
short response:
what on earth are GFS-related packages doing as part of a *standard*
FC install? i mean, seriously -- why would regular users *ever* want
to install clustering software?
longer response:
perhaps i misunderstood one of the eventual goals, but wasn't it part
of the plan to *pare down* what would be a standard install of FC, and
move a lot of what's there now onto supplementary disks? that
approach would solve a lot of problems.
seriously, i've never understood why FC4 sucked up 4 entire CDs. why
not just make the "Everything" install reflect a much more stripped
install, and leave the rest of it for firstboot or something like
that?
i can imagine at least a couple categories that would make sense to
push off until firstboot:
1) office software (OOo, as if you couldn't guess)
2) multimedia (all audio/video stuff)
and so on.
wasn't this part of the eventual plan? or something vaguely like it?
rday