[CentOS-devel] Considering repo re-structuring
wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro
Tue Nov 30 08:32:09 UTC 2010
On 11/30/2010 12:48 AM, Ned Slider wrote:
> On 29/11/10 21:08, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
>> On 11/29/2010 10:57 PM, Ned Slider wrote:
>>> No, giving this some more thought I would just put out a 2 DVD full
>>> distro set. Disk1 based on the upstream "Server" DVD and Disk2
>>> containing everything else (i.e, the upstream "Optional" channel).
>> I agree so far ...
>>> Disk1 would also be your "minimal" disk giving everything that's required to
>>> do an install meaning people don't need to download Disk2 to install.
>> .. but not here. When people want "minimal" they expect to do that with
>> a _small_ download. [*] A full DVD does not fit this bill, even if it
>> can be used for a minimal install, too.
>>> The upstream Server DVDs are 2.7 and 3.2GB for x86 and x86-64, respectively.
>> I sincerely doubt that anyone would consider those as "minimal". I am
>> tempted to say that minimal should fit a definition similar to "grab a
>> small image -- the smaller the better -- and use it to do an install
>> which can give you a local root account which can further be used to
>> install what ever else is needed. And which allows basic network tests
>> as it is".
> Which can be addressed by a minimal CD being discussed in a separate
> thread. I tried to avoid mentioning that here so as not to cloud the DVD
> media discussion :-)
> My use of the quoted term "minimal" was perhaps misleading - I meant it
> to refer to the fact that Disk1 could be used as a stand alone disk and
> would not require the "optional" Disk2.
Argh.. Indeed, it was misleading. In this case I agree with you , having
a fully contained first DVD ( even smaller than the maximum size allowed
by the standard !) labeled and able to be used as "server DVD" would fit
More information about the CentOS-devel