Tim: >> Personally, I wouldn't mind it if disc 1 was really "core", was small, >> and didn't *need* any other disc to make a working system. Mike Cohler: > Well there is also the possibility that for a new arrival to Linux it > should be an easy job to make a system workable. An easy install, and > good tools to make it all happen from the single set of disks that the > new user uses to install the system is important. To be honest, if it's going to be a *set* of discs, I don't think it matters if the first one is a different size than the rest. I can see value in a small bare-bones disc, extra stuff discs, and everything but the kitchen-sink DVD. > However I also know that if you are installing a new version each time > one is released (every 6 months or so) and have a number of computers > to deal with, then any extra time needed to download stuff like KDE or > other big packages will multiply up to make it somewhat time-consuming > to deal with. Which it would be, whether a one big download, several discs downloads, or individual packages... > If it is all on CD (and not everybody has DVD writers or readers yet > despite it being 2006 !) On that note, it occurred to me that it ought to be easier to do non-CD/DVD installs. Network installs aren't too bad if you have more than one PC, but working out how to do an install from downloaded files on the same PC could be made easier. Perhaps a routine to pre-setup GRUB for upgrading/replacing existing Linux systems from a local ISO. You'd just run it, reboot, and pick the right menu option. Without having to do follow several web pages of instructions about how to set that up. -- (Currently running FC4, occasionally trying FC5.) Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
