Fedora 10 on XO
pbrobinson at gmail.com
Fri Dec 5 05:22:53 EST 2008
>> > is xfce the right choice? i know it's "easy", but we should be
>> > sure it's correct. (i've been using it on my own xo, in a
>> > relatively unsophisticated way, but in the end that only makes it
>> > feel like an unsophisticated interface, so i may not be the best
>> > judge. :-)
>> I agree that the choice is yet to be made and isn't totally obvious.
>> I prefer using GNOME, but our current answer for "How much disk space
>> does it require to run Fedora 10 and GNOME and apps?" is "a 4GB SD card
>> and 256M of swap", so it seems hard to get there from here. Maybe we
>> can run GNOME and some tiny set of apps without blowing the NAND budget,
>> - Chris.
> Well, in the early days of the "Fedora on XO" project, I was working
> with Jim on evaluating the possibility of reducing Fedora's image size
> heavily to make it e.g. fit on the NAND or a SD card. To give you an
> idea where we landed: The latest tries with XFCE resulted in an 300 MB
> image. Using GNOME didn't change a lot, but if I remember correctly, it
> was a few MBs bigger...
I don't think it would be too much bigger than the current joyride
image (dependant on what apps you want to add) gnome is quite
dependant on e-d-s but we already have the likes of xulrunner,
abiword, totem etc for apps. The foot print to add their "standard"
interfaces isn't massive. Then you need a windows manager, nautilus
and gnome-panel. The question is then what deps they pull in and
filing bugs to get them as slimmed down as possible. Some of the new
deps will be pulled in anyway because Sugar wants to add support for
things like printing.
More information about the Devel