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

Re: Bug#788702: override: make default install a bit smaller

Ansgar Burchardt <ansgar@debian.org> (2015-06-14):
> Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org> writes:
> > I'd be happy to see a D-I Stretch Alpha 1 release before these changes
> > are implemented so that we have a set of reference images. It would make
> > it slightly easier to assess possible side effects once these changes
> > are implemented. At the moment, we're waiting on a fix for the linux
> > FTBFS on amd64 before we get a chance to upload debian-installer and go
> > further for a release dance.
> Sure, no need to hurry. Does the affect d-i (the images) directly? Or do
> you just want to delay the changes in the Packages index to be able to
> compare installations of Stretch before/after the changes?

TBH I'm not entirely sure about the former (possibly through debian-cd@
but not looking into it this night^Wmorning), but making the latter
possible definitely looks like a worthwhile goal.

> I'll also wait with changes to "init", but that needs further input from
> systemd/sysvinit maintainers anyway[1].

Thanks for the pointer, I'll try to keep an eye on that, but feel free
to keep us posted about the results.

> And one more question: how does d-i make use of the "tasksel{,-data}"
> and "dmidecode"? These are also installed in the target as "important",
> but I'm wonder if they are just used as part of the installation
> process. I've refrained from changing their priority to avoid breakage.

tasksel is a tool one can also use within the installed system to
(de)select tasks after installation, so not touching tasksel* at this
point would seem like a reasonable status quo. I don't think they're too
heavy or pull too much stuff anyway.

No facts/opinions about dmidecode right now.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: