|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
john maclean
|
 Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:33 am Post subject: |
 |
|
As always I'm impressed by the CD. Anything else I want I can grab from the repo.
|
_________________
BLAG 'em up! |
|
 |
mullenbrock
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 2:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Add xmms2 to the new packages available in place of xmms or audacious or something.
|
|
|
|
pistonbrew
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 11:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i'd like to see nicotine return to the repos or cd. or any other soulseek client, i'm not fussy.
|
|
|
|
bohu
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 5:49 pm Post subject: RE: list of stuff to be removed |
|
|
These are the only things from your list that I would miss:
alacarte, mplayer & plugin, gstreamer stuff.
but remove them anyway if you want. I know how to apt-get :-)
If you really want to reduce the size why not cut all the server stuff (apache, ssh, and lots more)? Anyone geeky enough to run a server is probably using Debian, Fedora, or Slackware anyway. And even if they do run Blag they can apt-get whatever they need.
Last edited by bohu on Fri Dec 22, 2006 6:07 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
dylan
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 5:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
One of the selling points of BLAG is that is seems to have these nice server-related utilities.
Now, correct me if I am wrong, but don't the BLAG servers run their own operating system? I would certainly hope that they do. If they are, that proves it is practical to run BLAG as a server operating system.
I vote to keep the server tools.
|
|
|
|
bohu
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 6:14 pm Post subject: well... |
|
|
that's a very good point. But still, anyone running a server is technical enough to apt-get install apache, ssh, ftp, and whatever else they need.
|
|
|
|
jebba
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dylan wrote: | | Now, correct me if I am wrong, but don't the BLAG servers run their own operating system? I would certainly hope that they do. If they are, that proves it is practical to run BLAG as a server operating system. |
Some parts are on blag. The NFS server and main web/ftp server are BLAG. Mail server is debian along with the lists (I think that's what autistici runs). The forums/bugzilla/wiki were on blag but we moved them over to Jason's box which is either running fedora or RHEL, I'm not sure.
-Jeff
|
|
|
|
dylan
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Some parts are on blag. The NFS server and main web/ftp server are BLAG. Mail server is debian along with the lists (I think that's what autistici runs). The forums/bugzilla/wiki were on blag but we moved them over to Jason's box which is either running fedora or RHEL, I'm not sure. |
So now, the question remains, which server performs better? Are they comparably equipped machines? Probably not, but can we make a conjecture as to which server OS runs the most efficiently?
|
|
|
|
jebba
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It kind of depends what you want to do. Fedora always has the latest possible bits. Debian is good for long term as there aren't base releases very often at all. I prefer BLAG/Fedora for things like asterisk. For NFS, Fedora incorporated NFSv4 far before the others, I believe. "Which is best?" depends greatly upon what you are trying to do...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
