Re: PROPOSAL: Core redefinition
On Sun, Jul 25, 2004 at 12:06:46PM +0100, Andy Green wrote:
I did not say network access should be a prerequisite. Whatever Yum
or
I know you didn't say that, but there are sometimes people that bring
this up related to this kind of install and the repository question
w.r.t. CD's etc. is currently not (complete) there, although adding
this is very doable.
I understand your point. But if the plan is to create this Core /
Extras
discontiguity anyway, and now RH seriously considers to move KDE into the
ghetto, then this is "shrinking the core distribution".
Was moving KDE a RH proposal? This thread has become to large to
remember everything, but I strongly vote against that too ;-).
The minimum install in Anaconda is bloated, it's not
Anaconda's fault but the
dependencies listed in the RPMs. I know this because I did some work to
This is true and I would encourage looking into all the dependencies.
Sometimes a package just requires Perl or so because there is a sample
Perl script included in the docs...
It occurs to me this might not map on to the RH grand plan of FC
-> RHEL, in
which case I gracefully concede nothing is going to happen with it.
RHEL is lacking a lot of useful packages, unfortunately. And in the
past people did reject Red Hat Linux (the free version, up to RHL 9)
because so much packages (that Debian and SuSE did have) were missing
even there. Not me, but I have heard that complaints from several
people.
The good-old Red Hat Powertools had poor packaging quality. My main
fear is that for example Fedora Core will be reduced to RHEL packages
or even less and Fedora Extras will end up having the quality of
RH Powertools in the past, so that you have to repackage stuff yourself
to get a good quality. Saying this, I have to admit I did not looked
at the fedora.us packaging quality, so maybe they do a better job than
RH Powertools.
--
-- Jos Vos <jos(a)xos.nl>
-- X/OS Experts in Open Systems BV | Phone: +31 20 6938364
-- Amsterdam, The Netherlands | Fax: +31 20 6948204