Just wondering: why is the fedora minimal install iso (266 M) so much larger than the ubuntu one (26 M)? Clearly, these are two different distributions and I do not mean to imply that one is more preferable than the other in this aspect, so I was just wondering.....
For the Fedora minimal install (I was referring to boot.iso) while for the Ubuntu, I was referring to mini.iso. I suspect that the answer may be that boot.iso can do far more than a minimal install, in which case (just speculation), wouldn't it be useful to also have a minimal install iso?
I have not used Ubuntu much: that is my wife's distribution. I have stuck with Fedora from Day 1 even though it has become less stable since the middle of Fedora 14. (Just my observations: I still prefer F to U, though).
Many thanks and best wishes, Ranjan
On Sat, Mar 03, 2012 at 08:22:37PM -0600, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
Just wondering: why is the fedora minimal install iso (266 M) so much larger than the ubuntu one (26 M)? Clearly, these are two different distributions and I do not mean to imply that one is more preferable than the other in this aspect, so I was just wondering.....
For the Fedora minimal install (I was referring to boot.iso) while for the Ubuntu, I was referring to mini.iso. I suspect that the answer may be that boot.iso can do far more than a minimal install, in which case (just speculation), wouldn't it be useful to also have a minimal install iso?
I have not used Ubuntu much: that is my wife's distribution. I have stuck with Fedora from Day 1 even though it has become less stable since the middle of Fedora 14. (Just my observations: I still prefer F to U, though).
You're correct that the Fedora install boot.iso has more content and functionality. Since much of that is designed to power the Anaconda installer, moving to a smaller ISO wouldn't be that useful. You'd still need to download all the content at install time to make use of the installer.