I like the name server-minimal, or even just minimal for the purpose of what the current version is.

Perhaps this super skinny version ought to be called.. micro?

Dan



On 19 March 2014 16:41, Jeff Sheltren <jeff@tag1consulting.com> wrote:
Karanbir Singh wrote:
>
> the aim being to setup a base image, that is under 150mb to download and
> deploy.
>
>

I think there are (at least) two different types of "minimal" that could
(and should) be provided.

1) "working server minimal" which would have at least yum and sshd --
this could be similar to what we do for minimal now, though I'm not
totally opposed to shrinking it down a bit more.

2) "really really minimal -- and we mean minimal!" -- where the goal is
to strip out as much as possible, no docs, no yum, no ssshd, etc.

I don't have a use for (2) personally, but use (1) -- or at least one of
my own making -- quite frequently.  I'd be happy if we could keep both.

-Jeff
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel