Minimal ISO for CentOS 8

[jabuzzard]

One of the purpose of Centos is for server install, no ? or i missed something ?
A minimal iso to install servers should be mandatory, not "maybe one day, if it's raining but not too much..."
Some people like gokhanp (3 messages ahead) proposed a solution (thanks) since several months.
Why not using this (or ask him help) for the official iso ?
I initially thought it would be good for centos 8.1. I really thanks all peoples making Centos for their great works ! I do not have the skills to do this but it seems it is not a difficult task compared to others and it was already done for previous major version of Centos.

A minimal ISO is absolutely not required other that for some really rather unlikely corner cases that can be fixed with the application of a very small amount of cash.

Firstly just because you have a full ISO there is not requirement to install everything. The argument that you need a minimal ISO because you are going to do a minimal install is consequently complete rubbish.

Secondly if you can download a 2GB ISO you can download a 6GB ISO. Sure it will take longer but it is similar orders of magnitude and you only have to do it once.

Thirdly I have not seen a USB stick as small as 8GB for sale at retail in quite some time now. They are under 5USD on eBay in the UK if you actually need to buy one.

Fourthly any DVD drive not capable of reading a dual layer disk is exceedingly old. By my reckoning it would predates the introduction of 64bit x86 processors. However CentOS 8 does not support 32bit x86 CPU's so it would need to be some Frankenstein machine. Replace the DVD drive with something more modern.

Fifthly dual layer DVD blanks are cheap (under 10USD for a stack of at least five delivered here in the UK), and dual layer writers have been the default for over 15 years now. I find it highly improbable anyone with access to a DVD writer does not have access to one capable of doing dual layer DVD's.

Sixth, if none of the above work then you can always do a net install. I have not seen a 64bit x86 server ever that didn't have an onboard NIC and was capable of PXE booting.

While I don't support everything RedHat have done in terms of dropping support for older hardware in RHEL8, the above is the sort of cost/benefit analysis they are likely to have done, and dropping a minimal ISO is entirely sensible.

Frankly I would much rather that the CentOS team did not waste time doing an entirely pointless minimal install DVD to satisfy a small number of people who are entirely to cheap to live with a standard ISO.

[MartinR]

Just out of curiosity, when quoting prices for purchases in the UK why use "USD"? £ (or if you insist GBP) would seem more logical.

[DaBear]

RE: jabuzzard
There are MANY reasons a minimal install is needed.
"Firstly" - There are companies that use "older" hardware for training, testing, proof of concept, internal/non-production jobs, etc.
"Secondly" - a lot of companies have budget restraints that force resourceful administrators to make due with what is available.
All that is being asked for is a smaller installation media so the rest of us can accomplish tasks asked of us - regardless of the environment.
@CentOS - please give back the minimal install. Let us get back to working in an efficient manner.
Thank you.

[TrevorH]

Unfortunately no-one that has any influence over whether a minimal iso is produced or not ever reads these forums so the best thing to do is pile on the bug report on bugs.centos.org and comment there. However, all of those reasons you quote can be addressed by using the boot.iso (the old netinstall.iso renamed) and a copy of your local CentOS mirror (if you're a large company then you'll run your own and if not, why not?). The boot.iso is already the smallest it can be since it contains no packages at all, just enough of a boot environment to boot up and find a mirror.

[jewels]

I need a minimal image for Supermicro's IPMI interface 'virtual media' mount using html5. The current limit is 4.7GB

[TrevorH]

So use the boot.iso

[jewels]

Thanks!

[rwebb616]

A minimal ISO is absolutely not required other that for some really rather unlikely corner cases that can be fixed with the application of a very small amount of cash.

It's not always about a small amount of cash. I live in a place where I have no internet options other than T1. Currently I have 2 of them bonded which is a ton of money and a max of 3 Mbit... all I can get. Download 7GB (current ISO size) on 3 Mbit and see how quickly you wish you have a minimal ISO! As one other poster stated he's in another country where internet is not as plentiful.

Secondly if you can download a 2GB ISO you can download a 6GB ISO. Sure it will take longer but it is similar orders of magnitude and you only have to do it once.

Last time I checked the minimal ISO was in the MB range not GB range... even at 900MB it's starting to get too heavy for me even.

Thirdly I have not seen a USB stick as small as 8GB for sale at retail in quite some time now. They are under 5USD on eBay in the UK if you actually need to buy one.

Maybe if you're in a modernized country. Again a previous poster indicated that this wasn't an option for them.

Fifthly dual layer DVD blanks are cheap (under 10USD for a stack of at least five delivered here in the UK), and dual layer writers have been the default for over 15 years now. I find it highly improbable anyone with access to a DVD writer does not have access to one capable of doing dual layer DVD's.

It's really not about the media - it's about the download and internet bandwidth required.

Sixth, if none of the above work then you can always do a net install. I have not seen a 64bit x86 server ever that didn't have an onboard NIC and was capable of PXE booting.

Sometimes there are situations where servers are not internet connected (again think third world country here) .. It's mandatory to use media to do the install.

Frankly I would much rather that the CentOS team did not waste time doing an entirely pointless minimal install DVD

Well I'm glad that YOUR opinion is the only one that matters here. It's NOT pointless to several others as indicated by the responses.

My vote is in FAVOR of a minimal ISO.

Rich

[isaacgossage]

I would also like to add my vote for a C8 minimal install.
I'm trapped under lockdown trying to setup an HP server via ILO 4, that is located on the other side of the country. No there's no optical drive, but the ILO system allows me to load an iso as if it were plugged in locally.

But without a minimal install image it's virtually impossible to install remotely.
I am not allowed to travel to the server with a USB key due to the pandemic - and trying to upload a 7 GB iso to the ILO doesn't seem to work.

We're not all sat next to our machines. They are often in different corners of the planet.

As for

Frankly I would much rather that the CentOS team did not waste time doing an entirely pointless minimal install DVD to satisfy a small number of people who are entirely to cheap to live with a standard ISO.

from jabuzzard
Aside from the arrogance, just because you don't need a minimal install image does not mean that others do not. Oh and it's spelt "too" - "too cheap", not "to cheap".

It would be interesting to see the download stats for previous centos images comparing the minimal install image.

[TrevorH]

You can still use the boot.iso and a network based install.