Once upon a time Tuesday 25 May 2004 12:30 am, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Mon, 24 May 2004 09:57:13 -0400, seth vidal <skvidal@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > cd/dvd images of extras are dramatically simpler, though b/c they don't > > have to boot and be in order. > > don't have to be in order? Are we saying that we are going to be > happy with the idea that if extras spans 5 cd images while core spans > 1... that its perfectly okay that users trying to use those 5 cd extra > images will have to swap in those 5 cd images somewhat randomly to > fill the dependancy chain? I thought part of the point of ordering > images was to prevent the extra hassle of having to repeatedly go > between cd1 and cd3 over and over again during the install process. > Why would this be any different for Extras? > > And I'm also somewhat concerned that whatever mechanism is created to > tie in Extras into the install/upgrade proces...that mechnism needs to > be general enough to encompass 3rd party repos too. No hardwiring of > extras into the default logic of firstboot or anaconda. No a priori > knowledge of the groupings to expect on the extra cds, things like > that. Whatever works with extras needs to work with things like > intranet or 3rd party addon media, in a general way...including > defined package groups outside of Core comps definition. i think we should look at how debian put togethether there cd images all up they have 7 binary cds you can do a minimal install from 1 and 3 gets you the most common stuff and the last 4 are more obscure packages. they shouldnt be random but package foo on cd 2 should have all dependancies met in cd 1 and 2 while package bar on cd 3 needs its dependancies met from cd1-3 what would be really neat is to specify a location say a nfs share that has the iso images and the package installer i.e yum, apt, or up2date could mount that isos and get the packages off without having to make a package tree Dennis
