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

Re: What virtual package is "minimal system"?



On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 08:12:59AM -0500, hendrik@topoi.pooq.com wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 12:48:25PM +0100, Joris Huizer wrote:
> > Andrei Popescu wrote:
> > >On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 10:39:39 -0500
> > >hendrik@topoi.pooq.com wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>I managed to install etch on my AMD-64 system, except that in the 
> > >>package selection I could not even ask for it to nstall "minimal system" 
> > >>because of dependency conflicts.  Neither could I do manual package 
> > >>selection -- it just never did that part of the installation even though 
> > >>I had reqiested it.
> > >>
> > >>But aptitude will run on my newly installed system.
> > >>
> > >>So my question now is, what virtual package to I ask for in aptitude to 
> > >>get the equivalent of "minimal system" during installation?
> > >>
> > >>-- hendrik
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>-- 
> > >>To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org 
> > >>with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact 
> > >>listmaster@lists.debian.org
> > >
> > >
> > >What do you consider a minimal system might be totally different for 
> > >others. When you get to the base-config you already have the minimum to 
> > >run a machine ;)
> 
> I noticed.  And even the networking aptitude needs.  Very useful.  And 
> I'm using it.  It's not the file server for my home network.  I'm still 
                        ^
What a typo! I meant "It's now the file server..."

-- hendrik

> not using the machine directly because the installation is so minimal, 
> but I moved my home directory to the new machine from another that 
> found itself severely diskspace-challenged, and I'm now using an NFS 
> home directory with *no* *problems*. 
> 
> I'm glad I could complete the installation without the designated 
> "minimal system" and get something usable.
> 
> > >
> > >Andrei
> > 
> > One way to get the system to be really minimal, is to mark *everything* 
> > as auto-installed (M in aptitude), and then to select those packages you 
> > need to be there as manually installed (m in aptitude)
> > note that this is not for newbies - if you forget to mark some packages 
> > as manual, that are necessary for, say, network support, or something 
> > else you require, you're in trouble
> > 
> 
> I'd worry about forgetting the packages necessary to run aptitude and 
> the keyboard and monitor in textmode...  I suspect that 8al* the 
> dependencies aren't there ... for example, most commands don't have a 
> dependency on the shell that you need to have so you can type in the 
> comand and execute them.  Strictly, of course they don't need a shell to 
> run -- there are other ways of launching a program, such as the one that 
> the kernel uses to launch the shell.  Another example is X, where the X 
> clients don't need the X server, because, after all, you could be using 
> an X server through the internet on a maching halfway around the world.
> 
> I wasn't looking for a *truly* minimal system.  I was looking (perhaps 
> misguidedly) for the collection of packages I usually get during 
> installation when I select "minimal system".  I would select that 
> virtual package, and make any adjustments necessary to resolve the 
> conflicts I encountered, and install.  As it is, I keep doing 
> things and finding out they don't work, switch over to aptitude, 
> installing packages containing the missing commands, and so forth.
> Maybe I should just continue in this way and things will stabilize.
> 
> -- hendrik
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org 
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> 



Reply to: