further package removals/potential package removals

[Sean Middleditch]

On Sat, 2005-01-22 at 11:45 -0500, John Ellson wrote:
> Féliciano Matias wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> >Remove rpmdb.
> >move experimental gcc (gcc4 in FC3 for example) to Fedora Extra.
> >  
> >
> 
> You're kidding, right?  Where is your smiley?
> 
> I haven't used anything but gcc4 for the last six months.  It catches 
> more bugs that gcc3.

So?  That has nothing to do with whether a package is applicable to
being in Core or not.  You *can* use gcc4 if it's in Extras, you
know. ;-)

> 
> It would make more sense, IMO,  to make gcc4 the primary compiler and to 
> deprecate gcc3.

Right... except that gcc 4.0 is not yet released and is a
beta/experimental compiler.  The last time Red Hat made an experimental
compiler the default they caused a metric ton of hell for everyone...

> Or just leave both around.  Its not a disk hog like some other packages.

I don't think being a "disk hog" is the criteria here, either.  It's
simple - either it's a core package required for the basic functionality
Fedora intends to deliver (i.e., basic server, basic development box,
usable desktop, whatever) or it's something that is an _extra_.  gcc4 is
by its definition an extra, since its not the default and not even
_installed_ by default, and it is in no way required for any use case
that Fedora has that isn't solved by another package already in Core
(gcc3), so it should thus be in Extras.

That's what Extras is for - extras.

Even if cutting out gcc4 only saves a few megabytes, cutting out all the
packages in the same boat as gcc4 might just cut Fedora Core down to two
CDs, and maybe someday down to one.  And it's not like you can't just
get some Extras ISOs.

Fedora really does need the ability to install off Extras CDs during
install time, though.  It should be seemless - other than telling the
installer which CDs you have, the package selection process should
completely hide which ISO which package is on.
> 
> John
>