-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Robert Schiele wrote: [...]
So what people actually mean when they say "minimal package set" is actually either a "what-_I_-want-at-least-on-my-system package set" or a "what-is-needed-for-a-specific-job pattern set". In the first case you will never reach consesus by obvious reasons. In the second case you don't need _the_ "minimal package set" but you need _a_ "minimal package set" for a specific job.
So if this discussion should become constructive you should discuss about a minimal pattern that should be installed when installing a new system or a pattern that should be installed for doing this or that but not mix up everything and call this undefined thing "minimal pattern set".
That's pretty much was I was about to post on the topic.
I think the discussion is not going anywhere because everyone has a
different understanding of "minimal package set".
As Robert wrote, I think we should first define what kind of "minimal
package sets" we want/need.
- From the discussion up to this point, there were already a few
interesting proposals:
- - chroot (that's probably the most minimalistic, not even RPM in there)
- - very small without network (if that's of any use at all)
- - very small with network
etc...
cheers
- --
-o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/
/\\