On Thu 15 Jun 2017 at 06:26:55 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote: > On 06/14/2017 12:56 PM, David Wright wrote: > >On Wed 14 Jun 2017 at 08:50:18 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote: > >>On 06/13/2017 01:10 PM, Brad Rogers wrote: > >>>On Tue, 13 Jun 2017 12:51:10 -0500 > >>>Richard Owlett <rowl...@cloud85.net> wrote: > >>> > >>>Hello Richard, > >>> > >>>>netinst iso. I had never experimented with just how much could > >>>>be done with netinst without any internet connectivity. > >>> > >>>Probably not a lot. See; https://www.debian.org/CD/netinst/ Internet > >>>connectivity is expected to exist. > > > >Well, it sort of depends where you draw the line between internet > >and Internet connectivity. Fifteen years ago I played about with > >a private partial mirror where the source of the debs was via > >commuternet, ie Zip/Jaz disks transported from my Janet-connected > >office. The "internet" was a cat5 cable. > > > >>I'm wishing I had discovered the netinst iso years ago. > >>*NOTE BENE* Up until about a year ago I had only dial-up. The only > >>practical installation path that met my needs was purchasing > >>complete DVD sets. I spent many hours trying to coerce Debian into > >>doing a minimalist install. > > > >What parameter are you actually minimising? > > For the purpose of this thread, the downloaded byte count. Period. > > However understanding netinst will influence how I approach doing a > "minimal" install. [I use quotation marks to emphasize that "minimal" can > mean very different things to different people.] > > >>If I had succeeded, I suspect the result > >>would have been close to netinst WITHOUT internet connectivity. But > >>I've learned a lot. > > > >Does it make any difference to the resulting package list whether you > >install using netinst or a stack of DVDs? > > I doubt it. If there were significant differences it would indicate a > problem.
I'd see the netinst ISO as Debian's flagship product. A stack of DVDs puts icing on the cake with a multitude of packages and very much reduced bandwidth usage. (Is it wise to have a mix of nautical and baking terms in the same paragraph, one wonders?). > >I had assumed that you could > >deselect all the options in the "Software selection" screen whichever > >way you installed, and end up with the same thing, a system with > >~248 packages installed. > > Are all 248 packages "necessary"? [Note usage of quotation marks ;] As you imply, "necessary" means different things to different people. I install without packages of priority Standard:. That gives me 207 packages on Stretch. I regard the less utility as necessary, so get it afterwards. The 207 can be further reduced to 179 with some ruthless culling. (Is nano required when vim-tiny is already there? Does rsyslog add anything to journalctl? emacsen-common? tasksel? gnupg?). > A mechanics question, "How to count the number of installed packages?" > I'd like to be able to reproducibly count installed packages. dpkg -l | grep ^ii | wc -l -- Brian.
