> From: Jesse Keating <jkeat...@redhat.com> > On 10/09/2012 05:55 AM, john.flor...@dart.biz wrote: > >> From: "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johan...@gmail.com> > > > >> I personally want to see the documentation releng/fesco has about what > >> the default minimal set, what the process is to have something > >> include,excluded from it and why the packages that exist in it are there > > > >> in the first place. > > > > I too would very much like to see this as almost all of the (hundreds, > > soon to be thousands of) systems I manage start life as a minimal install > > and grow "just enough" to fit their role. I take "minimal" quite > > literally in that I believe it should be the absolute minimum to boot, > > login and install more atop of that, but only as needed. Anything beyond > > this is some "use case", but minimal is minimal. > > > > -- > > John Florian > > > > > > > > > > And now we see why Anaconda did /not/ have a "minimal" option for a > while. Minimal means different things. > > To some, it means an OS that boots, lets root log in, read man pages, > use non-english languages, and add more packages with depsolving. To > others it means an OS that boots and lets root login, and that's it. > Others feel that minimal should be enough to give you a filesystem and > runtime you can chroot into (but no kernel/bootloader).
I stumbled onto the multiple meanings while writing that message. I had started to say that minimal should consist of no more than grub, kernel, bash, login, yum and their deps, then thought to myself, well of course I want init (systemd) and ... and ... So maybe I should say that I think Fedora has always had it just about right, IMHO. A very small, but functional system ready to grow and can do so with its own tools. > Right now, "minimal" is defined in comps, as a set of packages. > Installing this group will depsolve and add more of course, which is > controlled by the packages itself. Anaconda will add a few more things > forcefully, such as a kernel and a bootloader and potential arch > specific utilities, as well as authconfig and > system-config-firewall-base in order to add the root user and configure > the firewall. Makes sense, but can someone please tell me what "comps" stands for? I mostly know what they're used for, but have never guessed the acronym. My best guess just came to me after years of pondering: compilations? Anyway, I feel rather stupid asking this Q, but hey "there's no stupid Qs, right?" ;-) -- John Florian
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
