[CentOS-devel] Centos server installation
supergiantpotato at yahoo.co.jp
Tue Aug 2 11:28:28 EDT 2011
On 08/02/2011 06:44 PM, Roeland Mertens wrote:
> On 02/08/2011 10:37, Karanbir Singh wrote:
>> On 07/29/2011 11:05 AM, cephas kamuchira wrote:
>>> I am just suggesting a new opinion on centos server.
>>> During the installation, why cant you add a check or click all box to
>>> select all packages you are going to install when choosing packages or
>>> service you want to install in the server. i have to do the clicking on
>>> 1 at a time just to install like 300 or more packages.
>> I suspect there is no reply to your email, since not many people were
>> able to completely understand your point. Are you saying that when a
>> group is selected, all rpms in that group ( mandatory and optional )
>> should be automatically selected ?
> I am assuming that he means to suggest a button to "select all" in a group.
> Right now on certain groups when you select them for installation will
> only install for example 11/93,
> I think he means to add a button that allows him to add the other 82 in
> a single click.
We had this discussion in Fedora-land a while back. There are pretty
solid reasons why this was removed in Fedora and later RHEL as an option
(the FESCo logs of it are around somewhere, as are a few blogs detailing
this after the fact).
Installing *everything* is not normal use and can cause weird things to
happen (depending on use -- for example when alternatives install next
to or over defaults and admins often don't realize this is happening,
particularly with sendmail/postfix or 389-DS/OpenLDAP).
...and for people who *really* want to do this, 'yum install"*"' works
just fine and lets you know a lot more than Anaconda does. The quotes
around the * are necessary. This can be placed in a kickstart script or
a firstrun hack but neither tier of upstream consider it a good idea to
tempt the average person installing a system with such a nuclear option
before they've even seen the system defaults working the way they were
Anyway, wouldn't this break "binary compatibility with upstream"?
Just my $20
More information about the CentOS-devel