From owner-freebsd-qa Sun Aug 26 10:10:57 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from winston.freebsd.org (adsl-64-173-15-98.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net [64.173.15.98]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B34637B41D; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 10:10:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by winston.freebsd.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id f7QHAcw17115; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 10:10:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@freebsd.org) To: olgeni@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Subject: Re: XFree86-4 & ISO In-Reply-To: <20010824214923.Q56582-100000@olgeni.olgeni> References: <20010824214923.Q56582-100000@olgeni.olgeni> X-Mailer: Mew version 1.94.1 on Emacs 20.7 / Mule 4.0 (HANANOEN) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20010826101038C.jkh@freebsd.org> Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 10:10:38 -0700 From: Jordan Hubbard X-Dispatcher: imput version 20000228(IM140) Lines: 56 Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I'm not sure what the deal with XFree86 4.0 is, but I agree that there should be only one copy, whatever form we distribute it in, since XFree86 3.3.6 is still the "official version" for us. As to the lottery for packages on CD #1, that is indeed what print-cdrom-packages is for, though as you've also correctly surmised, the resulting package set also has to _fit_ or the follow-up commit will only be one which removes things again. Good luck. :) - Jordan From: Jimmy Olgeni Subject: XFree86-4 & ISO Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 11:39:35 +0200 (CEST) > > Hi! > > I see that we have XFree-4 on the first ISO, both in single-package > and multi-package form: this adds much bloat to the already crowded > CD. > > * The multiple package set is never needed as a dependency: we current > do not ship packages compiled for XFree4 because XFree4 is not > installed by default (and let's leave it this way: see xf86cfg) > > * The monolithic package currently has some security fixes that the > multiple set lacks. > > * If you really want to install XFree4, chances are that you want the > full working version, at the cost of having maybe some more fonts that > you won't need. > > I think that the multiple package set may go away from the CD, freeing some > space to add some applications that people usually expect to find (like the > recently added rsync). > > In my opinion, the set of applications on the first CD needs to be more > "formalized". We currently have a very small set of "granted" applications, > and the rest is more of a lottery. For example, the RC1 ISO only has very > very few gnome packages. Is the current packages script actually used in > ISO releases? :) > > I made a new print-cdrom-packages.sh script which should take into account > some of the common libraries, applications, development tools and build > dependencies. Unfortunately, KDE and Gnome take so much space :( > > Comments are welcome. I'm currently working on a package set for CD#3 > (with larger stuff like TeX) > > (script at http://people.freebsd.org/~olgeni/print-cdrom-packages.sh, about > 415MB worth of packages) > > -- > jimmy > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message