Excellent point Jdog( I assume that's the name)
I must add that the Fedora Live cd put out by Fedora-Unity has consistently
failed to properly detect my video card as well as the one on my parents
computer. It seems there is no dynamic generation of the xorg.conf file.
Rather the vesa driver is enabled which sadly does not work for many cards.
This is a problem I hope will be resolved. Good luck. If you need any help
please as and if I or other members can't do it we can hopefully direct the
proper people to come and provided assistance.
Ok, I should probably reply to the thread I started.
So it sounds like the basic agreement is that the key 'missing' feature
is an installable livecd, with the install-from-livecd method being so
useful it could potentially replace the standard installation method.
My thoughts on this are-
- I'm personally a little more concerned with the generic robustness of
the livecd as a livecd. I can see why fedora, playing catchup in the
livecd space, might be tempted to pursue the livecd-installer feature,
but I would remind people that the evolution of other great livecds
started with a robust livecd, and then added the livecd installer
later. Personally I'd like to see a robust fc6 livecd, without
installer, that gets widely used, just as a livecd first. I think
there is a lot of development and testing/quality-assurance
infrastructure that needs to be layed down to achieve that. I think
there is a lot you can do to make a livecd popular that you can't do if
you are trying to make it be the holy-grail installer replacement from
the beginning. I.e. putting so much emphasis on the installer feature
will bog the project down, because it will take so much work on so many
corner cases to actually make it replace the age-old standard install
method. (not that it can't be done, but I think it should be done
incrementally, i.e. a robust livecd first, then beta installer that
evolves to installer-replacement quality).
- regarding the actual implementation of the install-from-livecd, I
think that all methods described so far are useful, valid, and should
all be available in the ideal output. I.e. the livecd generator should
be able to include:
a) a version of anaconda that talks to network repos, and basically
behaves more or less just like anaconda does now on the standard
install cd(it is technically a livecd already...). I.e. upgrades
matter, full flexibility matters***
***tangent) one thing that has always bugged me (and many others) about
fedora and other linux distros, is that it is not trivial and obvious
how to reconfigure the things configured during install. I.e. I think
there should be a post install system-config-* for every aspect of
configuration during the install, and that the interface should look
similar enough that users realize it's the same thing. I.e. the whole
gparted not as good as anaconda partitioning, or the long time it took
to see most of the system-config-* tools which are finally approaching
b) the version of anaconda in (a) should also be able to talk to local
repo, if the livecd generator was told to include a local repo.
Optionally the local repo could be dynamically generated by repacking
livecd files, to save space (i.e. keep enough info in the livecd
filesystem to reconstruct the rpms on the fly).
c) an installer that just installs the same system as on the livecd
should exist, which requires no extra repos. Possibly via rebootless
method I previously outlined, or a simple tarcopy from the mounted
livecd fs, along with partitioning tool and bootloader install tool
(e.g. pilgrim(?)). Then, the livecd installed system, should be one
which is (a) locked down and smartly configured as a 'base' system (b)
trivially post-install reconfigurable via the system-config-* tools (or
GUI control-panel-alike) into any kind of system that could have been
configured via the traditional installer/configurator(i.e. anaconda).
Anyway, in conclusion, I plan to work on the above sorts of things.
Much more so in 2 months when my school workload drops by about a
factor of 3. And hopefully there isn't some radical aspect of this
installer debate which I'm oblivious to because I haven't yet played
with the latest RHEL beta.
Low, Low, Low Rates! Check out Yahoo! Messenger's cheap PC-to-Phone call rates
I too had the idea of using anaconda to install from the live-cd, the idea
was to first use a dvd, then eventually find a way to narrow the package
list down, to allow for the use of a cd. I think however this may not ALWAYS
be the best method. I don't mind having the basic setup on the cd copied
directly to the disk, in that manner I don't have to use up a dvd, instead I
will only need to download and burn a CD. So long as we get something like
ubuntu's reconstructer to allow each person to EASILY reconfigure the cd to
their tastes and their needs. Both ideas are necessary, an all inclusive dvd
and a basic cd. It would seem the use of anaconda on the dvd would be a good
idea since for the most part people won't want to have ALL that software
installed and anaconda allows for that customization.
While I have my own projects and goals, I was wondering what the
general status is regarding this list - "fedora live cd".
Specifically, I'm curious as to what the top 3 unfinished goals are for
this project. And what the current plan for achieving those goals is,
and where the output will be hosted for testing that meets those goals
(when that happens).
It seems to me, that there should be a checklist/bugzilla of features,
that describe what we are aiming for, such that if someone uses
kadischi or pilgrim or some other tool to generate a prototype, that
beta testers can refer to and evaluate said prototype.
Obviously there are many desired features, but what I'd like to see, is
maybe a weekly/monthly listing of the top 3 "todo items", so that we
can start knocking them off, and seeing things progress.
So, to clarify/reiterate-
1) where are the alhpa/beta prototypes (give me urls/torrents that
2) what are the top (3) priority features that are missing.
One of the key things I've been working on in my own project, and
mentioning here for some time now, is that I'd like to see a completely
automated livecd generation system. Such that a cvs tree of extra
files/configuration might get nightly/weekly built into a testable
.iso. I think if we had that infrastructure, it would drastically
increase the rate of progress on the project. It would be like "hey,
feature XYZ on build fedora-livecd-20061020a.iso is broken", or "this
build just got this feature, please test."
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
Chitlesh Goorah, I am curious if I can get the latest version of your
GUI frontend for Kadischi.
I have some time available and would like to toss around with the GUI a bit.
It looked good last time I saw it.
I know this is somewhat tangential to the list, but I was wondering if
anyone has had success making a bootable Fedora (preferably Core 5) on
an external USB hard drive? (Not a flash drive, but an actual notebook
hard drive connected to a USB adapter)
I've gotten to the point where Fedora is installed on the HD, a new
mkinitrd is built to include the necessary USB modules, Grub configured,
However, when Fedora starts to boot, it eventually panics because it
can't find the volumes. I've tried it without LVM, but that didn't
help. It just panics on trying to mount the partitions instead.
I've gotten DSL running from a flash drive, but I'd really rather have a
Fedora install on a USB hard drive that I could run anywhere.
Any insight would be appreciated!