| Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject: mini.iso
 Posted: Feb 27, 2007 - 01:50 AM
|
|
Joined: Nov 30, 2006
Posts: 72
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
I have been thinking about the bandwidth issues during the development cycle.
I was wondering if something similar to Debian netboot mini.iso (approx 6MB) might help.
Disadvantages are:
A distraction from the development of a full bootable distro iso.
Would require added scripting.
Probably not offer as friendly an installer.
Requires an internet connection on all installs.
Advantages include:
Reduced server and bandwidth load as most pieces would come from the various Debian sid repositories worldwide.
The ability to possibly target a separate repository for sidux development releases.
Reduced problems testing various localizations.
The same mini.iso might be used for testing various intermediate betas or previews along the way.
This also might be usable for the final release where people don't have a need for a version of sidux on a bootable CD and just use it an intermediate step to a hard drive insta llation.
Just an idea from someone who may not understand the whole process, don't hold it against me. 
Marcus |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: mini.iso
Posted: Feb 27, 2007 - 02:40 AM
|
|
Joined: Nov 30, 2006
Posts: 72
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
I thought about this further and it probably would not work as Sid repositories are so dynamic, not like everybody grabbing the same snapshot.
Marcus |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: mini.iso
Posted: Feb 27, 2007 - 05:05 AM
|
|
Joined: Dec 02, 2006
Posts: 1905
Status: Offline
|
|
| Perhaps the sidux team can weigh in on this suggestion |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2007 - 06:30 AM
|
|
Joined: Dec 02, 2006
Posts: 296
Location: Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
Status: Offline
|
|
Good thinking, DeepDayze.
I've seen lots of arguments on various distreos about what should be on the CD. Personally, I don't give a damn, as long as there's a solid base system that recognises my hardware, boots, loads the guts of KDE and runs with h2's script.
I like openoffice, rapid, privoxy, beryl and a few others like xpat2, but the beauty of a debian base is that you can just as easily load all the extra goodies you want from the repositories.
I think more attention needs to be paid to the contents of sources.list and the associated keys. Why not offer a long list of extra sources.list items to be uncommented at will, including every desktop on earth, every office suite, all the codecs etc. This might come with a script or cut-and-paste list for helping us simple folk to add all the keys we need. We might also have a section in the manual to describe some of the better extras. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2007 - 07:26 AM
|
|
Joined: Nov 26, 2006
Posts: 317
Location: Melbourne (VIC) Australia
Status: Offline
|
|
|
Quote:
"We might also have a section in the manual to describe some of the better extras.'.... paleoflatus
hhhhhhhhmm,, my thinking cap is on.
The non-free firmware list is reproduced from the release notes and can be found here in the manual:
http://manual.sidux.com/en/hw-dev-hw-dr ... m#non-free
An extended sources.list is in 'sidux status report', so i will include that as well.. I am reviewing where its best to be placed .
EDIT : Actually Sources was buried in Apt Cookbook in the Systems Admin Menu, i will revamp it and give it a high profile |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2007 - 12:47 PM
|
|
Joined: Dec 19, 2006
Posts: 1029
Status: Offline
|
|
| I use a ~ 100 to 110mb sidux build for my sidux hacking purposes. That is about as small I've managed to push a build down to with full kernel + headers and without compromising core hardware support. It is basically a debootstrap + kernel + minimal sidux magic and their dependencies. It boots into a tty and dumps you in a bash prompt. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2007 - 02:36 PM
|
|
Joined: Nov 30, 2006
Posts: 72
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Kelmo,
The Debian mini.iso has a cut down kernel with network/hardware detection, some scripts, a splash screen, and text files and very little else.
I'm sure a sidux version with it's increased hardware support would be bigger than the plain Debian version.
You choose a mirror and it detects what's available stable, testing, or unstable, it then downloads the suitable installer and base installation, which I think gets you to your minimal starting point.
Check out the mini iso here to see what I mean http://people.debian.org/~joeyh/d-i/ima ... y/netboot/
Marcus |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2007 - 03:23 PM
|
|
Joined: Dec 19, 2006
Posts: 1029
Status: Offline
|
|
| I am aware what the debian netboot iso is, we (sidux) don't plan to develop anything similar afaik, debian already fullfil that niche quite well . . . |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2007 - 04:55 PM
|
|
Joined: Nov 30, 2006
Posts: 72
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Kelmo,
Sorry, when you were talking about an ~100-110MB with a full kernel I didn't think we we talking about the same animal.
I was initially looking at it as a way to reduce server load and disk size limitations which was mentioned in the recent sidux Status Report.
IIRC currently Debian's netboot in expert mode will install a working sid, which is only a few steps away from a base for sidux, but quite often one has to settle for a testing installation due to problems within sid. When this happens Debian is not "fulfilling the niche quite well..."
On the other hand the magic of sidux (and previously Kanotix) tames sid and with the help of h2's du-fixes and various package warnings one could usually continue to use sid repos during these periods. I thought a combination of the basic netboot idea and the sidux team's abilities might make this possible.
Anyway it was just a suggestion, I sure you and the other members of the sidux Team, have a far better understanding of the situation and the pluses and minuses than I do and I can understand not wanting to stray too far from one's goals.
Thanks for your time and energy, 
Marcus |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2007 - 05:19 PM
|
|
Joined: Nov 25, 2006
Posts: 2555
Status: Offline
|
|
Both methods are not comparable, we can strip a bare bones KDE ISO down to ~290 MB, even less with fluxbox - but what use is this kind of ISO to the user, as it misses basically everything you would expect to find? Furthermore such a minimal ISO doesn't "magically" expand to a king sized DVD once it has been downloaded.
--
This doesn't mean we won't offer smaller ISOs in the future - if server, mirror and upload capacity allow it. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 27, 2007 - 09:12 PM
|
|
Joined: Dec 02, 2006
Posts: 296
Location: Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
Status: Offline
|
|
Thanks especially to bluewater and slh for their opinions and information.
I think a mini-cd would be a waste of time - there are already other distros like DSL and Puppy out there for special purposes and it would be a shame for sidux not to use most or all of the capacity of a CD.
My point is that any reasonably comprehensive software selection would be OK for most of us - especially if a wider choice was prominently displayed and made easier to add from the repositories. We wouldn't need to argue so much about the relative merits of various programmes.
I think our project experts are moving in the right direction. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 28, 2007 - 12:24 AM
|
|
Joined: Dec 01, 2006
Posts: 324
Location: Greece
Status: Offline
|
|
I certainly agree with the above post that "our projects experts are moving in the right direction", but I think that there is another 'niche' for a debian sid distro that is a sort of above the puppy/dsl ultra mini, a sort of very-light.
DSL and Puppy are wonderful distros for very old hardware or using with a usb pendrive for accomplishing basic stuff like web surfing. email, text editing etc.
I do think however that sidux can/should try and fill in for those boxes that run/ran windoze 98, ie typically 128RAM. Sure dsl and puppy will run great on these boxes, but I think a debian sid distro (up-to date that is and easily upgradable) would be better. |
_________________
"Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it."
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 28, 2007 - 12:36 AM
|
|
Joined: Jan 20, 2007
Posts: 61
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
Well to me, a mini iso is the most valuable thing. The most important reason is, making everything works initially has been the most time consuming task for me in the past.
All I need is a bare bone system that can detect and configure all the critical hwardware, networking and X display is the among the most important ones. This is something I've been looking for right after I started to use Linux, but haven't found one yet.
For the application, I can and will install them myself. The most important reason is, there is no "recommended" applications in Linux world. For example, if you use vi, then you will hate emacs, and vice versa. So any distro have to balance the user preferences. Most will throw in 3 or 4 mail clients and window managers or even more than one desktop managers. This is what I hate most. I just need one, why I have to waste space one the others?
You can't please everyone, but a mini iso will please the majority of experienced Linux user -- they have their preferences already, and at least they don't need to spend time to get rid of those they don't want. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 28, 2007 - 01:29 AM
|
|
Joined: Dec 02, 2006
Posts: 296
Location: Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
Status: Offline
|
|
So there you go - anticapitalista and xpt are right, too - and it shouldn't be too hard to please them with a supplementary iso option.
As you probably guessed from my earlier posts, I was partly suggesting improved facilities for adding whatever your heart desires from the repositories (bluewater knows what I mean) and partly fishing for comments about a mini-iso.
Most distros succeed with a full CD of software, so that must be a priority. If we can also have a barebones system and an easier way of adding our personal choices, I think we'll have all the bases covered. Agree?
BTW, I'm originally a Kiwi and live in Queensland Australia now, but I lived in Canada (mostly in Toronto) for 16 years and loved it! |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Feb 28, 2007 - 02:10 AM
|
|
Joined: Nov 30, 2006
Posts: 72
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
I agree that a fully packed bootable CD or DVD is the way to "sell" the distro to the unintiated or those just wanting to try it out.
I also agree that a netboot that I proposed is not a good idea.
For those who want to do a hard drive install a smaller ISO may make sense and if one then wants to make a minimal installation one can.
They can pick the components they want from the repositories or perhaps fire off a script that apt-gets meta-packages or even "magically" all the pieces from the full distro CD or "king sized" DVD. The majority of packages could be pulled from the Debian sid repositories worldwide and possibly reduce the load on sidux servers if people choose to go this route rather than download the full CD or DVD.
Marcus |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
