[Rule-list] Modifying the current anaconda--progress update

[Martin Stricker]

Bill Crawford wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Chuck Moss wrote:
> 
> > As Wade mentioned in a later message the install does use some files
> > provided from the CD or network.
> > On the CD in RedHat/base are the following files:
> >
> > comps - 20k list of packages in groups
> >
> > hdlist - 1.7 MB compressed ~7 MB in ram,  RPM descriptions, some
> > file information, and such
> >
> > hdlist2 - 13 MB  compressed? ? MB in ram,
> 
>  Here's the problem.  I don't think we'll be able to reduce the memory
> requirements much unless we can replace this somehow ... my thinking
> at the moment is along the lines of creating a single CD with basic
> packages on and doing the install from that.  A second disk could be
> used to "upgrade" the system or otherwise add packages later, perhaps,
> once the initial install is complete.

What about giving the user only some preconfigured install options
("workstation", "router", "firewall", "server" and the like) which will
be kickstart scripts so (I think) no dependency checking will be done =>
far lower memory requirement? I don't know much about kickstart, I never
used it, so any ideas?

> > If the portions of anaconda we need to patch are on the CD then the
> > approach I have suggested won't work and a solution involving the
> > stock CDs would be a much bigger project. :(
> 
>  I'm afraid it very much looks like a custom CD will be required, but
> the actual packages can be the same as on the "real" install CD(s).

I'll ask on the linux-xfs at oss.sgi.com list how they did their custom
installer. Maybe the SGI staff can shed some light into this.

>  Seems to me that even some of these are superfluous; apmd isn't much
> use on very old systems, and unless hardware changes are going to be
> common, kudzu might be unnecessary.  I'm thinking too that dhcpcd and
> so on might be doable-without.  And for 486-class machines surely we
> don't need hotplug ?

reiserfs-utils without reiserfs? Both lilo and grub? etc. Yes, I think
we could throw something out of base-install. But on the other hand it
might be a Good Thing to have the standard Red Hat base install for
compatibility reasons? Maybe again kickstart could help? I think about
kickstart first installing the base install and then offer the
installation of more "package topics" like firewall, router,
workstation, maybe even a small X?

>  Oh, and redhat-logos can go (to be replaced with grass-snake-icons or
> something :o)

So this needs some graphically capable person, so definitely not me.
Volunteers?

Best regards,
Martin Stricker
-- 
Homepage: http://www.martin-stricker.de/
Registered Linux user #210635: http://counter.li.org/

_______________________________________________
Rule-list mailing list
Rule-list at mail.freesoftware.fsf.org
http://mail.freesoftware.fsf.org/mailman/listinfo/rule-list