Stefan Seyfried wrote:
On 25.10.2011 11:54, Per Jessen wrote:
Stefan Seyfried wrote:
On 25.10.2011 10:53, Per Jessen wrote:
For background see https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669498
For me, the objective in using the minimum server select is to have a _fast_ installation that is a good general basis for a (usually headless) server.
Which means: nothing installed but sshd. Because nobody knows what kind of services you want to serve
Yes, that is pretty much correct. There are some basic services needed by the system itself though (postfix, nscd, acpid, dhcpcd, syslog, cron, ntp etc).
Of course I was a bit exaggerating towards the "embedded" side. However, neither acpid, nscd, dhcpcd, cron or ntp are strictly necessary. They can be installed later.
My objective is more a "sensible base" rather than only what is "strictly necessary", I think the latter is really a different setup.
XEN guests run very fine without acpid :)
:-)
The resulting size of the installed system is largely irrelevant as a server will always have sufficient space.
Haha! Tell this to our 7000 VMs. Of course there is sufficient space, but it comes with a hefty price tag.
Okay, a point worth considering. Would a 1Gb root filesystem be too much?
Multiply the 500MB more with the 7000VMs. Look up the price per TB on your favourite storage vendor. Does that answer the question? :-)
2Tb Hitachi Ultrastars are about CHF100/Tb - SAS is much more pricey. Regardless, your price per VM is surely still reasonable even if you need 5Gb. (about CHF1.00 I get).
"minimal" being "minimal" is something I consider valuable.
Probably two different "minimal" patterns would really be more useful:
* minimal server (text mode) * minimal remotely useful server :-)
Yeah, I think we could do with an another pattern for minimal size. Maybe embedded/all-on-chip systems would also benefit from this?
the second one probably better would be "text mode server". Means: basically a pretty complete installation, good vim, aaa_base-extras, maybe even mc, but no graphical desktop and according libs.
The problem is that both pattern need a maintainer. Ludwig is maintaining the "minimal server" pattern and is maintaining it towards "less is better". I'm fine with that.
Which I'm not coz' it makes more work for me :-( although mostly when testing and trying out hardware. For regular stuff, I also customize one installation and then rsync that to new boxes.
If you are bothered enough by it, maybe you could volunteer to maintain the "text mode full server" pattern? As you have experienced with the broken pattern in 11.4, patterns are best maintained by people actually using them.
I was considering that, yes.
The installed system must be generally suitable as a server, i.e. when I ssh to it for maintenance or tracing/debugging, I don't want to be missing anything.
This contradicts your previous sentence.
How? I don't have a complete list ready, but I want things like vim, man, strace, tcpdump and bind-utils available.
I consider man totally unnecessary on a server. Simply because I can look up the man pages on any machine on the network, so it is unnecessary to have any documentation on the common server machine.
man != documentation. I primarily want 'man' = the utility.
But it is much easier to install minimal and then do "zypper in `cat mycustomlist.txt`" than it is to remove all that unnecessary stuff you never need, I'd vote for a "minimal" that really is as minimal as possible.
Okay, thanks. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (11.3°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org