Dreaming of a lean installation method [was Re: *nix on
Angel Martin Alganza
ama at ugr.es
Wed Apr 11 14:18:09 CDT 2007
On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 02:47:57PM -0400, der Mouse wrote:
> >> ClassicBSD would need to be about 'have to have' functionality, not
> >> 'nice to have' functionality.
> > I couldn't have though of a better way of saying it: 'have to have'
> > is exactly what I would love to see on an OS which I would use a lot.
> The problem, of course, is, whose idea of "have to have" controls? For
Of course me :-) Seriously, that's why I said on another email on this
tread that having an installer which would install a very minimal
system (NetBSD?) but packages and/or ports would be available could be
a good idea. We all might agree on things like the system should run
(w/o X on 2MB RAM), for example, but some might want to run X and some
not; or that the base system should not take more than (just to say
something) 40MB of HDD, but some might have 80MB HDD and some 2GB HDD
and might want to install an amount of software according to it; that
vi should be the editor and mwm (m for Mouse, not for Motif ;-) the
window manager per defauls, but some might want to use Vim ans Ion ;-)
instead. No one is allowed to install/run/use/talk about KDE, of
> ...this is clearly a "have to have" for one of us - but definitely not
> for another (me). I consider FORTRAN support and S/Key totally
> junkable frills - but a C compiler is not optional. I'm sure there are
> those that disagree with each of those, and quite possibly some who
> disagree with all of them.
Couldn't both of them, FORTRAN and a C compiler be optional
packages/ports? many people (I for one, most probably) wouldn't need
to run either (or any other compiler) on such a system, anyway.
Angel @ Granada, Spain
PGP Public key: http://www.ugr.es/~ama/ama-pgp-key
3EB2 967A 9404 6585 7086 8811 2CEC 2F81 9341 E591
() ASCII Ribbon Campaign - http://www.asciiribbon.org/
/\ Against all HTML e-mail and proprietary attachments
More information about the cctalk