On 9/24/09 12:00 AM, Glynn Foster wrote:
>
> On 24/09/2009, at 2:06 PM, Glenn Brunette wrote:
>
>>
>> I am sorry if I am coming in late to the discussion, but I had a few
>> cycles and wanted to ask a few questions.
>
> No late discussions - just current ones ;)
>
>>> - Drivers
>>> - All included unless reason not to (IB, iSCSI, FC, ...)
>>
>> Does this mean that all drivers will be installed by default? Is there
>> any way to separate these out? Virtualized platforms may not need many
>> of the drivers that are installed by default today.
>>
>> I realize that there is a tradeoff here. We want things to just be able
>> to work, but if we are putting together an absolute core set of packages
>> that people could potentially use as the base for minimized
>> installations, (virtual or physical) appliances, etc. - then it would be
>> nice to have a true core set of drivers that can be supplemented as
>> needed. With the advent of the network package repo, installing new
>> drivers is not as painful as it used to be ;-)
>
> We could probably be smart about what we include for sure. The general
> consensus with the LiveCD has been to include as much as we possibly
> can. I guess we may be able to change things based on the discussions
> around the device driver update work that's going on.
>
>>> - Non graphical device driver utility
>>> - Enough to get basics working out of the box
>>> - ZFS, CIFS, COMSTAR
>>
>> I would say that even CIFS/COMSTAR may be too much for a "Core" although
>> my definition of core is closer to the Solaris 10 view of SUNWCmreq. We
>> have a lot of customers who want to build minimal configurations and if
>> this is not the place that is fine, but I would like to make sure that
>> anything done would not inhibit work to put a smaller footprint in place
>> at some point. Thoughts?
>
> I think that's a somewhat separate discussion to the default package
> list for an interactive text install. I appreciate the value in a
> minimalized core (and I believe we need to have one at some stage), I
> just don't think we're ready to have that discussion until the package
> refactoring and naming project completes though. One obvious direction
> may well to have a selection of package selections based on a specific
> task (email server, AMP stack, ...), as I touched on when looking at
> Ubuntu server.

I certainly understand and this matches other discussions that I have
had on this topic recently.  Do we have an ETA for the package
refactoring work to begin and end?  Is there an OpenSolaris project
for this?

g

Reply via email to