NOTE to the list at large:
I debated sending this to Bryan privately, but decided that in case
anyone is ever curious about my intentions when I refer to a distro as
either "kitchen sink" or "lean", this might be a handy primer. As such,
I'm posting it to the list. Thanks for your forebearance.
Bryan J. Smith wrote:
> [ Be sure to note the "P.S." before you respond. ;-]
>
> Debian comes on 14 CDs (or 2 DVDs).
> It is a "kitchen sink" distro.
>
> Fedora Core is much "leaner" at 4 CDs.
> Plus I can install just want I need from Fedora over the Internet from a
> 4MB CD image.
> Or I can even grab a 6MB FAT image and boot from my FlashDrive on my key
> ring!
>
> I like to install Fedora in a 90MB "minimal install."
> And then I YUM everything else.
>
> Sometimes I install X, GTK+, APT and Synaptic.
> And then I "point'n click" what I need.
>
> It's very intuitive.
>
> Unlike Debian.
> It's bloated and unorganized.
>
> -- Bryan
>
> P.S. See what I mean? This example post shows _total_ignorance_ of
> Debian! That's _exactly_ what you're doing with _Fedora_!
>
Actually, no, it's NOT "exactly what [I'm] doing with Fedora!" I
include equivocations, I don't suggest that Fedora cannot be installed
with minimal software, and so on. Fedora is optimized for kitchen sink
installs, and is better at them than Debian is. That much is obvious,
even without any direct experience with Fedora, just having used the
Anaconda installer with a couple of other distributions. Even the
Anaconda installer from very old RHL was better at kitchen sink installs
than either Debian's new installer or that packaged with Woody by default.
Likewise, Debian is more "optimized" in its installation methodology for
lean installs than Fedora, by all accounts, is. Even when using the
text-based installer for Fedora, under optimal circumstances, you don't
get a much smaller resource footprint than that used by the standard
(new) Debian installer, and in order to get to that point it seems
(correct me if I'm wrong) that you have to enable swap space for it,
which is not required for the standard Debian installer. The Debian
text-based installer is, of course, even smaller. I'd have had Debian
Sarge installed on a laptop with eight megabytes of RAM if I didn't give
up on the boot floppies that the laptop didn't seem to like after
several tries. (For the record, the only reason I was using the
floppies is that the laptop wouldn't boot from CD.)
Because Fedora's installation methodology is optimized for installing
"everything, kitchen sink optional" and Debian's is optimized for
installing a "lean, somewhat emaciated" OS, I refer to Fedora as a
"kitchen sink distro" and Debian as a "lean distro". That's all there
is to it. It's not based on some negative estimation of Fedora's
design, but on an acknowledgement of what each is better at. You've
assumed the worst without bothering to ask for an explanation, even
going so far as to at one point say that I've "demonized" Fedora by
calling it a "kitchen sink distro". That's just not what I've been
doing. You're arguing against an opinion that doesn't exist.
-- Chad ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:23:32 EDT