FC5T2 ready for even a test release?

[Richard Hally]

Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Hi
> 
>> Why do you think it keeps coming up?
> 
> You are the first for this release.
This is the first release that doesn't have it. ;)

> 
>>>
>>> Everything installations are generally a bad idea.
>>>
>> Generally but not always!
>> In my case, one of the things I'm doing is looking for things that 
>> don't  have SELinux policy that need it.
> 
> What do you mean by that?
I've been using the 'strict' policy since the 'Targeted/Strict' split 
and looking for things to run that will produce avc denied messages.
> 
>>
>>>
>>> * Redundancy - While Fedora Core itself is slowing moving towards 
>>> providing more packages as part of the Fedora Extras and possibly 
>>> doing several different targets the current selection uses multiple 
>>> programs that provide the same functionality, browsers or desktop 
>>> environments for example and its better for users to use a graphical 
>>> tool like pirut and install packages as necessary.
>>
>> For those of us that run 'rawhide' redundancy is good and it saves 
>> time to have "more than one way to skin a cat" already installed.
>> Don't you want "everything" tested?
> 
> Use yum to install the rest.

'yum install available' doesn't work! try it =;)
> 
>>>
>>> * Security, manageability  and performance -  As more and more 
>>> packages are installed on a system the amount of  updates and 
>>> interactions between the packages that the user has to handle 
>>> drastically increases. For users who are using Fedora as  a 
>>> development system or using it just to learn Linux where the system 
>>> serves no other purpose and a high amount of bandwidth is available 
>>> this might make sense 
>>
>> You just gave another reason to have a 'everything' option. Plus don't 
>> you want to make it easier for people to test everything? I'll bet 
>> there are things in FC that no one uses and never gets tested.
> 
> Use yum.

see above

> 
>> BTW, what are you doing to get the number of CDs back down to 4?
> 
> Not a agreed upon goal AFAIK.

Just another indication of bloat or the need to move more things to Extras.

> 
>>
>> but for others
>>
>>> users who use it deploy it at various levels the amount of updates 
>>> and potential security issues that they have to deal with packages 
>>> that they might not even use is a additional burden. Moreover the 
>>> additional packages installed might need listen to network 
>>> connections by default making the systems potentially more vulnerable 
>>> by increasing the attack vector. Additional services enabled by 
>>> default also affect performance.
>>
>> That has nothing to do with whether or not there is a 'everything' 
>> option.
> 
> It does. Everything opens up more services.

That for a long time produced bunches of avc denied messages.

thanks for all the good work-- It's looking good.

Richard