Why Aren't All Core Installed by Default?

xtraroot · 2014-01-15 02:28:47

Why aren't all the programs in [core] installed by default? Shouldn't they be in [extra] if they aren't?

karol · 2014-01-15 02:40:43

I have most of them installed, but I see no reason to install stuff I don't need e.g. utilities for other filesystems, ppp & friends, lvm2, linux-lts, efibootmgr ...
Which packages would you suggest moving to [extra]?

HalosGhost · 2014-01-15 02:44:27

Another example to compliment karol's. Both nano and vi are in [core], but I don't want either of them. I use vim (which is in [extra]). [core] consists of a few utilities (some of which are alternatives of others) which allow you to create a usable, though incredibly minimal, GNU/Linux install. You don't, however, need all of them.

All the best,

-HG

Last edited by HalosGhost (2014-01-15 02:44:56)

/dev/zero · 2014-01-15 02:47:34

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Of … ories#core

If the requirement were that all not-strictly-necessary packages should go to [extra], then the only things in [core] would be the kernel and an init script.

ANOKNUSA · 2014-01-15 02:53:23

What constitutes a "core" system is subjective; things in the [core] repository are packages that probably were historically thought of as part of a "core" Linux system, but which have been superseded by other things. Someone who, for example, has been using the same machine(s) for twelve years will need packages that folks with machines made in the last five years won't. Also, people coming from other distros will have different ideas on what the "core" system is; if you install Gentoo by strictly following the Gentoo Handbook, you'll be using nano to edit files. I've used either vi or Vim for some time now, so I don't need nano installed, but someone coming from Gentoo might expect it, at least during installation.

EDIT: ...but on further review, the link /dev/zero provides makes much more sense.

Last edited by ANOKNUSA (2014-01-15 02:54:56)

xtraroot · 2014-01-15 03:25:57

Thanks for the replies,

karol wrote:

I have most of them installed, but I see no reason to install stuff I don't need e.g. utilities for other filesystems, ppp & friends, lvm2, linux-lts, efibootmgr ...
Which packages would you suggest moving to [extra]?

Was just thinking when I needed locate, that I find it's in the core repository. I thought core meant it's part of the core Arch Linux packages and they were installed by default, but the explanation that it's part of what's thought to be the core of a traditional system makes sense, I guess. It just seemed like most of the core were installed with the base install, so I thought it weird that some aren't, but are still classified as core.

Last edited by xtraroot (2014-01-15 03:26:50)

Allan · 2014-01-15 03:42:36

[core] is mainly a set of packages that we think are important to a working system so want signoffs on their updates.

w201 · 2014-01-15 15:34:57

Hey Allan- was scanning through your blog on the packages you maintain for Arch and whatnot. Just out of curiosity, what kind of skills and programming languages does a guy like you have to know to become a proficient developer for Arch?

karol · 2014-01-15 15:38:19

w201 wrote:

Hey Allan- was scanning through your blog on the packages you maintain for Arch and whatnot. Just out of curiosity, what kind of skills and programming languages does a guy like you have to know to become a proficient developer for Arch?

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Ge … veloper.3F
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/De … A_Packager

teateawhy · 2014-01-15 21:06:06

xtraroot wrote:

It just seemed like most of the core were installed with the base install, so I thought it weird that some aren't, but are still classified as core.

To finally clear this up, the packages installed with the "base install" are all part of a package group called "base". Not all packages in the repository "core" are part of the group "base" (, the set of packages in "core" is a superset of the set of packages in group "base"). To show the list of packages in this group that you have installed, use:

pacman -Qg base

The installation of all packages in the "base" group (and more) happens after you type the following command during the installation:

pacstrap /mnt base

It is possible to leave out "base" in the command, as it is the default.

GloW_on_dub · 2014-01-16 01:30:41

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Trusted_Users#How_to_become_TU.3F wrote:

know Google-Fu

Never heard that one.

Inxsible · 2014-01-16 17:09:30

Means you should know how to use Google to solve problems if you encounter them instead of just sitting on a package because your compilation etc failed.

drcouzelis · 2014-01-16 17:27:18

HalosGhost wrote:

Both nano and vi are in [core], but I don't want either of them.

You dirty EMACS using swine! Your mother was a hamster and your

I use vim.

...ohhhhhhhhhhh. Never mind.

Arch Linux

#1 2014-01-15 02:28:47

Why Aren't All Core Installed by Default?

#2 2014-01-15 02:40:43

Re: Why Aren't All Core Installed by Default?

#3 2014-01-15 02:44:27

Re: Why Aren't All Core Installed by Default?

#4 2014-01-15 02:47:34

Re: Why Aren't All Core Installed by Default?

#5 2014-01-15 02:53:23

Re: Why Aren't All Core Installed by Default?

#6 2014-01-15 03:25:57

Re: Why Aren't All Core Installed by Default?

#7 2014-01-15 03:42:36

Re: Why Aren't All Core Installed by Default?

#8 2014-01-15 15:34:57

Re: Why Aren't All Core Installed by Default?

#9 2014-01-15 15:38:19

Re: Why Aren't All Core Installed by Default?

#10 2014-01-15 21:06:06

Re: Why Aren't All Core Installed by Default?

#11 2014-01-16 01:30:41

Re: Why Aren't All Core Installed by Default?

#12 2014-01-16 17:09:30

Re: Why Aren't All Core Installed by Default?

#13 2014-01-16 17:27:18

Re: Why Aren't All Core Installed by Default?

Board footer