[@core] working definition for the minimal package set

[Lennart Poettering]

On Wed, 14.11.12 17:05, Kevin Fenzi (kevin at scrye.com) wrote:

> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 01:03:03 +0100
> Lennart Poettering <mzerqung at 0pointer.de> wrote:
> 
> ...snip...
> 
> > > 
> > > I think it would make sense to focus on the intersection of
> > > installation set for these usecases. And hence:
> > > 
> > > No SSH. No Boot loader. And definitely not Sendmail. 
> > 
> > Also, no kernel and no kmod for A, as that is provided by the
> > container host.
> 
> That doesn't look like an intersection to me. ;) 

Well, if you look at all the usecases it happens that the container
usecase ends up being the most minimal, and hence the intersection of
all of them.

> How about a separate group for containers, since the packages and use
> case are very different than 'core' provides?
> 
> @core-container ? or @container ?

Well, it would be weird that the "minimal" installation is actually not
"minimal" at all, but the "container" installation is.

Lennart

-- 
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.