Respins

[Rahul Sundaram]

Rickey Moore wrote:

>
>
> */Andy Green <andy at warmcat.com>/* wrote:
>
>     Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>     > (a) fedora had a "seriously-minimal" install that was just
>     > enough to get yum working and (b) things that are almost-rebrands
>     I did suggest on fedora-devel a year or more ago that "Fedora
>     Core" would perhaps be more flexible if it really did mean 'Core',
>     ie, was a
>     minimal functional packageset, and there were onionshells around it
>     based on more extensive packageselection. But in the end the
>     problem is that with 'fullblown' package configurations that are
>     suitable for
>     desktop use, you can't really reach down into even ten times the
>     memory footprint possible with a Busybox-style implementation, so
>     Fedora will not stretch into machines that would like a
>     "seriously-minimal" implementation.
>
> Sounds like one heckuva! idea. Why not just update the core-utils to a 
> minimal run level, and update the rest as needed? How much could get 
> broke? A little? a Lot? It would sure circumvent the concerns of those 
> with a smoothly running Fedora 3, into Fedora 5, maybe with a couple 
> of hiccups.
>
> <waves hands wildly> I vote for this... Red Hat, wouldn't this be 
> better for the large users as well? Why didn't I think of this? <g> I 
> mean you could darn near yum this thing, and use a boot floppy instead 
> of 4 CD's worth.
>
> Sound idea <tip of the baeball cap to Andy's general direction> Raul?
> Ric

I would suggest bringing this idea with the above link to the 
fedora-devel list after FC5 is released. The work being done on OLPC 
project (http://www.redhat.com/magazine/014dec05/features/olpc/) can 
also be potentially leveraged here.

-- 
Rahul 

Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers