Someone's missing the point...

[Marc Wiriadisastra]

On Wed, 2005-08-10 at 14:34 -0400, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Aug 2005, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> 
> > The only way to change that IMHO is to distribute a million of
> > FC5  on media for free, that's basically all that's about Ubuntu.
> > Other than that I don't see any strong reason for Ubuntu's sudden
> > acceptance.  Yes, the debian base is a +, but it's not the first
> > debian derivative either.
> 
> I completely agree.
>  
> > What we need is Fedora DVDs with Core and some Extra packages,
> > in a shiny package.  The important question is who will pay for
> > the costs.  We need Red Hat or somewhere else (GNOME Foundation?)
> > support the production.  The distribution can be distributed on
> > the developers and evangelists for free I guess.
> 
> I agree with this too -- except that a DVD covers only half of our target.  
> What we really need:
> 
> 1. A Live CD;
> 2. A one-CD install;
> 3. A DVD.
> 
> We can spew out all the DVDs we want, but we're getting killed on the 
> one-CD install in most of the world.
> 
> My hope is that we make some headway in the Live CD project.  It will do 
> two things:
> 
>   a. Give us a Live CD (obviously);
>   b. Give us great tools for selecting the right packages for the one-CD
>      install.

Do you feel that yum is ready to work as fast or regarding dependancies
ready to handle a one-cd situation?  I've used both yum and apt and it
seems that apt with rpms is still more efficient in processing the data
required.  Maybe thats just me I'm not sure.

I personally believe a 1 cd install is a must since most people always
complain of the 'bloatedness' of Fedora.  They always point to ubuntu as
say thats what it needs to be like fast and efficient.  

I can see their point if they are a desktop user however I don't see
their point if they want to setup a server.  I personally always
download the dvd's for the pure sake that its one cd and its got
everything I personally need on it.

Regards,


Marc