Re: Secure/hardened/minimal Debian (or "Why is the base system the way it is?")

To: debian-security@lists.debian.org
Cc:
Subject: Re: Secure/hardened/minimal Debian (or "Why is the base system the way it is?")
From: cm@tahina.priv.at (christian mock)
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 12:47:09 +0200 (CEST)
Message-id: <[🔎] 20020520104709.B8AAED1841@laberl.tahina.priv.at>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] Pine.OSF.4.10.10205191923240.5048-100000@unicorn.it.wsu.edu>
References: <[🔎] Pine.LNX.4.44.0205201120200.25898-100000@daedalus.andrew.net.au>

> My final install, including our software, is under 200M. Right now, I am
> using Norton Ghost for imaging. I considered FAI but because I was only

For ghost-like functionality, I was very happy with systemimager,
which exists as a Debian package for woody and is easy to backport to
potato -- and free.

HTH,

cm.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-security-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to:

References:
- Secure/hardened/minimal Debian (or "Why is the base system the way it is?")
  - From: Andrew Pollock <andrew@andrew.net.au>
- Re: Secure/hardened/minimal Debian (or "Why is the base system the way it is?")
  - From: Nicole Zimmerman <colby@wsu.edu>

Prev by Date: Re: Secure/hardened/minimal Debian (or "Why is the base system the way it is?")
Next by Date: Re: Secure/hardened/minimal Debian (or "Why is the base system the way it is?")
Previous by thread: Re: Secure/hardened/minimal Debian (or "Why is the base system the way it is?")
Next by thread: Re: Secure/hardened/minimal Debian (or "Why is the base system the way it is?")
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread