On 5/2/07, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: > The thing I always wanted from an 'everything' install was the expertise > of the distribution packager as to whether something would likely be > useful to have installed. Someone, somewhere must have known enough > about the packages to decide what was worth including in the > distribution. I'd take their word for whether it should be on my hard > disk or not. There seem to be two mindsets when it comes to stuff like this. The folks who want everything there in case they might need it down the road, and the folks who want only what they need immediately, and if something else is required they'll install it later. I believe the latter to be the safest approach, given the ease of installing software with yum. The only reason I could possibly see for an everything install would be for a beginning user who has know idea what the package names are or what things do. They're not providing it because they think you'll need it. They're providing it because they think SOMEONE using the distribution might need it. For example, you don't need sendmail AND exim AND postfix, you only need one of them. -- During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell