[RULE] FWD: question about RULE installers

[Matthew Miller]

On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 07:55:57PM -0500, Michael Fratoni wrote:
> B.U. being in my home state, I suppose I ought to answer... ;)

Cool, thanks.

> It needs to remain a fork, mainly because I don't believe Red Hat has any 
> interest in these changes. For example, Miniconda functions by using it's 
> own boot.img floppy to boot the installer. This worked fine for Red Hat 
> Linux 7.2. When 7.3 was released, code had been added to prevent booting 
> the installer from a non standard boot.img. Disabling that code was 
> simple enough, but I found it rather odd that the code had been added in 
> the first place. Paranoia? Perhaps. So, Miniconda for 7.3 was built, and 
> worked fine. Then, 8.0 is released, without an i386 kernel package... 
> Just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get me. <grin>

I think it's mainly to make sure there aren't weird kernel version clashes.
But is really enough of the code to reduce memory useing in the first stage
(loader) part of the installer? Wouldn't you need to change the second stage
too? I guess I need to look at your code a bit before talking more. :)


> In any case, the changes, patches, scripts, etc. are all posted on my 
> server. http://www.tuxfan.homeip.net:8080/rule/miniconda/

Great, I'll check that out.

> A Miniconda installer? No. I never quite got around to finishing Miniconda 
> for the 8.0 release. I am currently fooling around with a new version of 
> Miniconda for 8.0, which should allow rapid release of an installer for 
> the next official release. Assuming of course that I get it finished and 
> it works...

If you're fooling around, I'd suggest at least using the copy from the
Phoebe2 beta, if not rawhide. That'll save you trouble when the next release
comes out....


> I can easily create an anaconda based installer for any given version, but 
> it would require RULE distributing the iso images. I don't have the 
> bandwith for that, and I doubt the FSF would be happy if we used their 
> servers either. We aren't trying to create a new distro, and that is 

I *do* have a new distro, so my goals are a bit different. :) What you're
doing does sound very cool, though.

> >> Basically: would we be
> > > best off adopting your installer for BU Linux?
> Depending on your needs, maybe. ;)
> The Slinky installer is an option. It does _not_ do everything that 
> Anaconda does, but it does install a working system. On first boot, kudzu 

Is it able to do a network-based install? That's key.

Either way, this looks like a good way to get a modern RH on my Toshiba
Libretto (which has been stuck at 6.1), even if it turns out not to be
helpful for the university at large.

-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm at mattdm.org        <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>                <http://linux.bu.edu/>


_______________________________________________
Rule Project HOME PAGE:  http://www.rule-project.org/en/
Rule Development Site:   http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/rule/
Rule-list at nongnu.org
http://mail.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/rule-list