Refusing to top quote...
Peter Bieshaar wrote:
I agree this is inconvenient for me ;) That's why I tried to suggest a
solution for my inconvenience. All I suggested is to have dependent
packages on the same disk, which I think could be done.
2006/5/4, Thomas M Steenholdt <tmus@xxxxxxx <mailto:tmus@xxxxxxx>>:
Peter Bieshaar wrote:
> I didn't mean previous FC CDs. But keeping rpm's more structured on
> CD's. So keep the dependent rpm's at least on the same CD. Just did
> a mysql server installation, needed 2 CDs.
>
The thing is that although this is inconvenient for you in this case,
chances are that other packages are depending on some of the same libs
and it may be hard to fit everything that have interdependencies on a
single disc, as long as FC is as large as it is atm.
/Thomas
I'm going to toss in a vote of support for Peter's side.
I tried to do as close to a minimal install as I could by de-selecting
every thing I could in ananconda and ended up needing all 5 CDs. FC-4
was nice for building servers because I could boot and install a minimal
system from CD 1 and then yum update and install up-to-date packages
that I needed from the repos. Trying that with FC-5 was extremely
frustrating, watching the (in my opinion) totally un-necessary
dependencies required from CDs 3, 4 and 5, for example bluez-libs sticks
in my mind as something I just had to roll my eyes at as I wondered what
on earth it was going to load off CD 5.
Would the simpler request simply be to ask for the "Minimal Install" back?
Thanks,
e.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
