On Fri, 08 Jun 2007 02:35:07 -0700 (PDT)
Radu-Cristian FOTESCU <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Sorry to reply while I am not an expert in SL, but why using FC6 repos with RHEL5? I wouldn't do that and expect dependencies to be solved!
>
> AFAICT, you can use all the SL5 repos, including the clones of DAG/Dries and ATrpms (and Flash), plus:

Thanks a lot! I found some of the addresses after "close encounter of the third kind" with SL. Taking into concideration your other post on SL LiveCD as well I suggest to put the above hyperlinks and config data to SL with category marks (best, good, we aware, on your own).

> >  running SL takes nearly 300 MB. When I removed GNOME I ended up
> > with IceWM and 2xx MB taken for "system stuffs"
> After you'll read this: <http://www.owlriver.com/tips/tiny-centos/> you'll see that even for CentOS4 (SL4), the minimum install was trimmed down to as much as  349...376 MB (from something more like 700 MB using Anaconda), so definitely RHEL is *not* NetBSD... unless Urs will concoct a MiniLiveCD for you :-)

I hope we understand each other. :) I was writing about memory usage, not system size. Perhaps you took a short cut in reasoning jumping from one subject (of memory usage) to another (system size). It doesn't matter as your remarks and the hyperlink are informative. Thank you.

BTW. Were there any efforts undertook to bring to SL/RH world NetBSD's pkgsrc package management? It is based on one fact - that all applications are born in source first. :) Second, all binaries go to /usr/pkg directory! No more /usr, /usr/local, etc Linux direcotory idiosyncrasy. Excellent division between system apps and user apps. That would end up all the mess with - "Repo this", "repo that" and your system is a crap (copyright pp). :-)

Cheers,
pp

--
Przemysław Pawełczyk (p2o2) - [log in to unmask]
P2O2 - http://pp.kv.net.pl, P2O2 Forum - http://www.p2o2.fora.pl/