Tim: >> Some people, and I don't mean you, but those putting together what they >> think is a minimal install list, have a strange idea about what minimal >> and required actually mean. Mike McCarty: > I suppose a "minimal required system" would be the kernel, the init > RAM disc, and tmpfs for /tmp. Not a very usable system. But when > you go beyond this, then you get into "minimal required to do <x>" > where <x> is some desired function. Everyone seems to have a different > set of <x> to put into there. I don't know of any objective means > to ascertain what <x> must contain. To me, minimal means just that... "minimal." It boots, no more, no less. We have package selection to add to that, where wanted. Start with minimal, add X, or add webserving, and so on. -- (Currently running FC4, in case that's important to the thread) Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists.
