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

Re: All packages ... again.



On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 11:02:00PM -0500, dario.bahena@correo.unam.mx wrote:
> Hi ...
> 
> Thanks to all the guys who answered my last question,
> in resume ... you say that it's not a good idea,
> (installing everything) since there are more than
> one program for some tasks and then, they can
> conflict each other. Besides, there are a lot of
> packages.
> 
> Ok ... so, I was used to the fact that, my system
> just have one program for the main tasks. If  debian
> has more than one option, I'd like to ask again,
> a couple of things:
> 
> a) If I'm not wrong, the programs can conflict each
>    other, just in the case of simultaneous usage.
>    For example, they can compete for the same directory,
>    the same TCP port, etc. But what could be wrong,
>    if I install all the programs for the same tasks,
>    and just "activate" one of them by configuration.
>    (and maybe, also configure the others to desactivate them).

That may be quite a headache to manage, especially for daemons.

> b) Aprox., How much disk space will be requiered to install
>    ALL the packages???
> 
> I want to install all the packages, just because
> I like having the program already installed, in
> the moment I need them ... maybe I install some
> programs that never will be used, but it doesn´t
> matter for me, I prefer that to loose some time
> downloading, maybe compiling and installing the
> program.

I don't know if auto-apt was available for potato, but it possibly would
do what you wanted (more or less).  You could also just copy the
archives to your hard drive, then install/remove as desired.  If
tracking one of the changing archives, you might mirror them...

> One posible trouble could be, that in the case
> it's posible, installing everything also means
> configuring everything, at least,  it seems things 
> are this way in the installation process. It'd be cool to
> have an option that configure just the "indispensable"
> for the system to survive, and permit configuring
> the rest "optional" things later. Or maybe, force
> the default configuration, but in the case of
> servers, don´t add them to the rc.?, just let
> them for later(posible) activation.

You're probably not saving yourself much here, since for the packages
where conflicts are most likely to arise, a fair amount of user
configuration might be required anyway.  Note: removing packages vs.
purging them will leave the configuration files behind (maybe useful for
what you want).

-- 
Eric G. Miller <egm2@jps.net>



Reply to: