[SM-Discuss] ISO suggestion
afrayedknot at thefrayedknot.armory.com
Wed Aug 4 11:23:35 EDT 2004
On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 11:16:34AM -0400, Jeremy Kolb wrote:
> Quoting Eric Sandall <eric at sandall.us>:
> > The problem with this (while it would be nice for some) is that many use
> > SMGL
> > because it doesn't install much in the beginning. ;) However, you do say
> > that
> > xorg could be optional (such as the NFS and SSH installs), but that would
> > increase the ISO size quite a bit.
> > I am not necessary against this as it would be a "nice" feature, but others
> > may
> > not like it.
> > What do people think of adding xorg (and only xorg, not xfree86) and,
> > say,
> > blackbox (it's small and fast) as an optional install?
> > -sandalle
> > --
> > Eric Sandall | Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
> > eric at sandall.us PGP: 0xA8EFDD61 | http://www.sourcemage.org/
> > http://eric.sandall.us/ | SysAdmin @ Inst. Shock Physics @ WSU
> > http://counter.li.org/ #196285 | http://www.shock.wsu.edu/
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
> > _______________________________________________
> > SM-Discuss mailing list
> > SM-Discuss at lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
> I like having a minimal iso. When you add X you have to make sure it's
> configured correctly and it adds a lot of stuff to the iso. It also adds more
> room for problems.
I agree, keep the iso small. We do have net based installs in the
development queue which would involve downloading the cache tarballs
from the web, and having only a small iso or floppy image to boot from,
at which point adding xorg and a wm as an optional package would be
cheaper as it wouldn't unnecessarily bloat the iso.
Perhaps as a compromise we can add a note to the install wiki
"if you really need to get work done, you might want to install X + a wm
before embarking on the update/rebuild."
More information about the SM-Discuss