On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Steve Grubb wrote: > We are going through this exercise in Fedora 11 right now and have a minimal > install that is looking pretty good. We may add a feature page to that > release to highlight what's been done to date. So, I don't think this helps
Awesome news Steve, thanks for the effort. On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Kenton Brede wrote: > I like the way Debian does it. You can install a very small base and > then add on from there. I think this is the way to go for a server > distro. But we use RHEL here, so I just pair it all down during > kickstart. I was just agreeing with the poster I was responding to, > that as a philosophy, it just doesn't make sense to install the > kitchen sink by default. Practically every security related manual > I've read starts out with something along the lines of, if you don't > need it, don't install/run it. True. I used to run Debian, but the management tools were a pain to get working. It may have improved, but I used to have to hand-edit or script stuff in pam.d and rc.d to get LDAP or whatever working. I can see the advantages of letting ISVs know that LSB is supported, no additional configuration needed. > And this is a desktop, not a server. I can see the benefit of, by > default, installing wireless, bluetooth, etc. Yes, but RHEL uses the same codebase for workstations. I want that stuff to just work. For servers, use NFS portmap or multipath as examples instead. _______________________________________________ rhelv5-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list
