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

Re: Fedora 7: The Linux Knight in Shining Armor?

Amadeus W. M. wrote:
> Say I choose the gnome desktop version. It's only my gut feeling, but I
> guess just about everybody runs sshd on their desktop. Theoretically, sshd
> would have to come with the server version of Fedora.

I think the big message to take away is that there will only be one
Fedora 7 repo (plus updates). If you can install something through yum
or pirut today, you'll still be able to get it that way -- no matter
which of the "spins" it appears in.

The "server", "Desktop", and "KDE" spins are *only* about what goes on
which CD or DVD.

And just because a package comes in a server ISO doesn't mean that it
won't be there in the desktop ISO. For example, you can be sure that
glibc and the kernel will be in all installs.

> So I won't be able
> during my desktop installation to tell the installer that I want to run
> sshd and have it automatically open up port 22 in the firewall.
> I kindda liked that. Same considerations for nfs (which many people, I'm
> sure, run at home for their 3 machine LAN). How about printing?

You can be sure that printing support will be in a Desktop spin. I
strongly suspect that file and print sharing will be considered part of
a desktop environment. sshd might well get in too -- it's very useful
and not that large. Other stuff -- if it's not there in the install
media, you'll still be able to download and install, just as you can

> On the
> other hand, I'm afraid I might be getting with my desktop release a bunch
> of exotic packages formerly in extras, that I would never touch. 

As opposed to a bunch of server packages that you'd never touch?

They're only going to be on the DVD / CD. The "install everything"
option isn't coming back.

There will probably be some large esoteric packages currently in Extras
(or possibly even in Core) that won't get in *any* of the spins.
No-one's mentioned it yet, but I could imagine TeX being left out of all
of them.

> The argument 32Gb vs. 24 Gb in the mirrors I don't understand. All current
> mirrors store both core and extras.

The problem is that mirrors currently hold the "exploded" package tree
(with all the RPMs), CD ISOs, and a DVD ISO (for all architectures). So
something like Firefox is already stored three times. So if someone
wants an 8 GB "everything" spin (or "everything that fits" spin) for
dual-layer DVDs, that adds 8 GB that the mirrors have to store.

> Would essential packages like the kernel, glibc, and other
> system utilities be stored 3 times (once for each of gnome/kde/server)?
> I suppose not. That'd be wasteful, wouldn't it?

At least four times -- in the various ISO images and in the package
tree, plus whatever if CD-sized ISOs and DVD-sized ISOs are produced.

But these essential packages aren't *that* large in the scheme of
things. It's OpenOffice.org that takes up a *lot* of space, and that
will probably only be in the Gnome Desktop spin. (KDE users will still
be able to download Fedora RPMs through yum or pirut.)

The idea would be that the Gnome-based Desktop, a "pure" KDE desktop,
and a server spin wouldn't have that much overlap.

Hope this helps,


E-mail:     james@ | The betting public are on average complete idiots (see
aprilcottage.co.uk | also lotteries for examples) and are uniformly
                   | incompetent at predicting horse racing results. So are
                   | bookies, but they know simple mathematics too, you see.
                   |     -- Dan Holdsworth

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