[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 07/10/2008 10:10:17 AM:
> Ed Brown ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said: > > Sorry, but 'sensible security' sounds too much like politico or salesman > > speak for "everything works out of the box!" > > When the alternative is "wait, you can't talk to the network because > ISDN/bridge tools/etc. aren't installed", absolutely. > > The reason things like that are installed in the default minimal > install is that there's not a good mechanism to automatically grab > hardware-specific packages specific to your machine. If something > like that comes around, that can change. > > In the meantime, "%packages --nobase" in kickstart should solve your > needs - if you're trying to install a large group of servers, you > absolutely should be using kickstart. Okay. So what I'm hearing here is that it is better for the vast majority to have to use kickstart to remove packages so that the minority can have something installed by default? Seems a bit backwards to me. Especially since if you do a base install, and ISDN is not installed, you can pop the disk back in and install the RPM, or wait... use a kickstart? :) (see, isn't that an annoying suggestion?) I think it isn't to much to ask to have a good Minimal install option back in the installer. I've already heard and been apart of the argument with one of the anaconda devs about this. I'll be nice and not target him by name, because I understand that he has his reasons. One of his standpoints is that now that the installer uses YUM and dynamic dependancy checking it is difficult to do Minimal/Full installs. He questions how you can define a minimal install if you can also specify a list of external repositories to install from. I see how that can cause some complications, but I'm of the opinion that if I put the disk in or point to the distributions repository and select minimal install, I'm talking about a minimal install of the distribution. Heck, If I want a minimal install, don't let me specify an external repository! If I want a minimal install with external repositories, THEN I can fall back on using a kickstart. Kickstart is a wonderful thing, I won't argue that, but I don't want to have to have a kickstart EVERYTIME I do an install. Seriously, that's such a pita. Why can't I just click next a few times and walk away? What if I do have a standard install base locally using a kickstart that does a bunch of things in it, but now I want just a quick minimal install. I now have to go edit a kickstart and come up with the concept of a minimal install and put it out there. This then takes me how much longer to get what I wanted? So then you say, well just make it once cause you might need it again. Well doing that install and then saving the anaconda-ks.cfg would give me that, but wait, I can't do a minimal install without a kickstart. If this many people have to come up with a work around and are going to gripe about it, there is a use case. I could go on for hours about the technical and support benefits a good minimal install would do not only for admins but also for Redhat. But I'm probably already annoying most of you so I'll stop. And this doesn't evn get into the security aspects that have been mentioned. -greg ps. okay fine... you can leave isdn in on the minimal install, but why does the service run in 345 by default??? Ooh.. check this out http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/MinimalServices _______________________________________________ rhelv5-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list
