Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set

To: Development discussions related to Fedora <devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set
From: Christopher Meng <cickumqt@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 10:13:54 +0800
Delivered-to: devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20121113012510.GA11614@disco.bu.edu>
Reply-to: Development discussions related to Fedora <devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

I think a minimal image is just like centos minimal.

-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set
  - From: Matthew Miller

References:
- Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set
  - From: Seth Vidal
- Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set
  - From: Petr Lautrbach
- Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set
  - From: Seth Vidal
- Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set
  - From: Petr Lautrbach
- Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set
  - From: Seth Vidal
- Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set
  - From: Jesse Keating
- Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set
  - From: Matthew Miller
- Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set
  - From: Jesse Keating
- Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set
  - From: Matthew Miller
- Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set
  - From: Jesse Keating
- Re: [@core] working definition for the minimal package set
  - From: Matthew Miller