On Wed, 2 Jun 2004, Corrie Kost wrote:

> I would tend to favour following the Redhat choices for what is loaded
> by the core distributions. To do otherwise would eventually cause problems.
> One can always adapt local installations to make additions say to the
> standard "workstation" distribution but they should not be forced unto
> core users. With the low price of disks we at TRIUMF load "everything" using
> the "custom" choice. It just makes upgraded easier as well as maintain a
> single
> site standard - and  has many more tools available should one ever need
> them.
>
> So please do not let the defaults drift away from what Redhat does for
> their distribution.

Scientific Linux already has changes from RedHat as documented in the
releasenote.  It is BETTER but compatible with  RedHat.  Note that most of
the changes are added rpms which either fix broken things or add needed
functionality.

If you install everything now then changing the default for the
workstation install will not affect you.

-Connie Sieh
>
> Corrie Kost
> TRIUMF
>
> John Franks wrote:
>
> >Hello,
> >
> >I have been experimenting with SL which I expect we will adopt for a
> >group of departmental workstations.
> >
> >I noticed that with a "Personal Desktop" install the main tetex packages
> >are installed but not tetex-latex (and I think tetex-xdvi or tetex-dvips
> >-- I don't remember which -- was also missing).  With a "workstation"
> >install tetex-latex is also not included.  Is this intentional or just
> >reflecting a RedHat choice?
> >
> >It may be that there are instances when one would want tex installed and
> >not latex, but I would expect this to be the exception rather than the
> >rule.
> >
> >--
> >John Franks <[log in to unmask]>
> >Dept of Mathematics, Northwestern Univ
> >
> >
> >
>