Re: FC4 for servers

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Res wrote:

I'm sure this argument has been had before, but what I'd like to see in FC4 is the ol server install, being just that, install has bare minimum stuff instlaled, FC1,2 and 3 seems to load a lot of not needed crap.

I mean loomk at a min server install for RH9 or even current slackware, then look at it on FC, guys a server install should be exactly that, WTF has cannaserver got to do with being a server, it doesnt! nor does several other things, the least stuff instlaled and run on a server is paramount, the more crap that runs that clearly is not needed = more and higher risks

 Lets not end up like m$ huh!


flame away :P

Unfortunately nobody is getting serious about that problem.
Last time I asked for the REAL minimal install they told me to propose the package list that I think is minimal. I honestly don't know. I would rather prefer Fedora people do that but don't put all the crap in your minimal installation or don't call it minimal.

Minimal installation for me is the following:
packages that are barely needed for booting the system. (kernel,glibc,etc...)
yum,up2date?,rpm to add more packages at will.
maybe some basic utility commands. (shadow_utils,mount)

That's all.

I don't want to beleive that nobody is able to identify the packages that are needed to only boot the system.

Look at alternatives:
Debian, has base install
Gentoo, has base install
FreeBSD, has base install
OpenBSD, has base install.
Solaris, has base install.

And please don't tell me that fedora is a desktop OS.

--
Vano Beridze
Software Developer
Silk Road Group S.A.



[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Photo Sharing]     [Yosemite Forum]     [KDE Users]