Re: less packages [was Re: From debianplanet]
On Mon, 2002-01-28 at 18:01, John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 05:53:35PM -0500, Sean Middleditch wrote:
> >
> > Yes, but having to handle each of these 18, fix bugs in them them, and
> > let the obsure, 3 user version of vi hold up/slow down the release of
> > Woody is retarded.
>
> --snip of rest --
>
> those are some good ideas. so good, in fact, that is exactly how things
> are.
>
> a bug in joe-bob's-vi will not cause any problems with delaying woody's
> release ATM because joe-bob's-vi is not in base. not even vim is in
> base. (nor is nvi for that matter)
Ah, OK. I knew Debian was laid out similarly to what I suggested, but I
didn't know I was *that* close. ^,^
>
> the cd's are arranged such that you only _need_ cd #1. the rest are
> extra bonus CD's. (actually, if you go the net route, you don't even
> need the one. but if you do use a CD install, you only need the one CD)
Just out of curiosity (don't have Debian CD's laying around), how usable
a system will CD #1 give you? To me, a usable *desktop* system is one
in which I don't need to install any additional software to do
office-type work, while a usable *server* system needs to include basic
apache/dns/squid/ldap/sql/etc. services. I am doubting then that a
usable system for all environments is on CD #1. ^,^
>
> -john
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
Reply to: