FC5T2 ready for even a test release?

[John Summerfied]

Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>

> 
>> Then, I got to the package selection
>> screen. I know that they're still working on it, but come on! With no
>> 'everything' option,I got very minimal packages.
>>
> Not this again. This is a feature not a bug :-)
> 
> Everything installations are generally a bad idea.
> 
> * Dependency issues -  One of the reasons behind doing a everything 
> installation is avoid dealing with dependency issues. However that is 
> largely not a problem now since yum install and yum groupinstall along 
> with along programs like pirut. Refer to the yum guide available at 
> http://fedora.redhat.com/docs
> 

If I were to do an "everything" install, it might be
a. To evaluate all the software
b. To create an evironment where I can rebuild everything.

I think both wishes worth supporting. I think the view expressed by 
"CodeHeads" that 'my way is the only way" is plain wrong.


<snip>

> 
> * 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.

I find having to dig out CDs later a pain. I'd rather have everything 
there from the start, especially if I didn't know what I wanted.


> 
> * 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 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.

I didn't think OP said anything about having services needlessly enabled.

There are times when having everything installed is a good and proper 
thing to do, and that should be the local administator's choice, not the 
vendor's.




-- 

Cheers
John

-- spambait
1aaaaaaa at computerdatasafe.com.au  Z1aaaaaaa at computerdatasafe.com.au
Tourist pics http://portgeographe.environmentaldisasters.cds.merseine.nu/

do not reply off-list