Hello list. I've just read this news (http://distrowatch.com/?newsid=02638) - in my opinion very good idea. What do you think? Regards.
On Wed, 2005-05-11 at 21:33 +0200, Dominik Sk?adanowski wrote:> Hello list. > > I've just read this news (http://distrowatch.com/?newsid=02638) - in > my opinion very good idea. What do you think? >I was looking at that :) Question is ... does it really serve a purpose? The purpose of the distro is to install on servers and workstations. A live CD doesn't do that. Knoppix is very good in this market, so I think the usefulness is limited. BUT ... one good thing it would do is allow you an easy way to see if your hardware works without downloading the whole shebang ... which is a positive. We may look at doing this after CentOS-4.1 is done and I have some of the automated scripts working the way I want. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20050511/f4c5a41a/attachment-0004.sig>
From: Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists at hughesjr.com>> I was looking at that :) > Question is ... does it really serve a purpose? > The purpose of the distro is to install on servers and workstations. A > live CD doesn't do that. Knoppix is very good in this market, so I > think the usefulness is limited.Especially since there are already "Fedora Live" CDs anyway. One of the reasons for RHEL is for a fixed, integrated tested package set based on but beyond that of Fedora Core. If I want to start playing around with a "customized" Fedora-based distro, then I'm just going to go with Fedora itself, instead of RHEL (or CentOS).> BUT ... one good thing it would do is allow you an easy way to see if > your hardware works without downloading the whole shebang ... which is a > positive."Fedora Live CDs" should do the same. Just line up the kernel version.> We may look at doing this after CentOS-4.1 is done and I have some of > the automated scripts working the way I want.The more CentOS would get away from RHEL, the more I'd just do my own configuration management from Fedora Core instead. I mean, I've built equivalent APT-RPM repositories of Fedora Core by lining up the packages. The reason why I like to use CentOS is so I don't have to do my own configuration management of Fedora Core to get the same thing of RHEL. It saves me a lot of effort. -- Bryan J. Smith mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org
On Wed, 2005-05-11 at 16:12, Johnny Hughes wrote:> > I've just read this news (http://distrowatch.com/?newsid=02638) - in > > my opinion very good idea. What do you think? > > > > I was looking at that :) > > Question is ... does it really serve a purpose? > > The purpose of the distro is to install on servers and workstations. A > live CD doesn't do that. Knoppix is very good in this market, so I > think the usefulness is limited.Some live CDs do have an 'install to hard disk' feature - then you pull in anything else you need from remote repositories.> BUT ... one good thing it would do is allow you an easy way to see if > your hardware works without downloading the whole shebang ... which is a > positive.Yes, this is the real value. It give you a 'seeing is believing' view of whether it works in your machine and which software versions are supplied with which bugs fixed *before* you have to overwrite your working system.> We may look at doing this after CentOS-4.1 is done and I have some of > the automated scripts working the way I want.If you can make the iso-building script public, it might also be useful for others to build application demos. -- Les Mikesell les at futuresource.com
Johnny Hughes wrote:>On Wed, 2005-05-11 at 21:33 +0200, Dominik Sk?adanowski wrote: > > >>Hello list. >> >>I've just read this news (http://distrowatch.com/?newsid=02638) - in >>my opinion very good idea. What do you think? >> >> >> > >I was looking at that :) > >Question is ... does it really serve a purpose? > > >Well, from my perspective as a user, what I was looking for when I found CentOS was not a LiveCD, but RHEL without the service contract. One of the reasons for that was that Fedora Legacy started off with big plans. We're gonna support RH7.3 and RH8.0 and RH9 forever, and we're gonna support, FC1, and FC2, etc. on a 1,2,3, out basis. That's ambitious. They finally gave up on RH8.0 but are still holding onto 7.3, 9, FC1, FC2. And as of now, any honest observer would have to say that the only currently supported distro is FC3, and that by the Fedora community and not Fedora-legacy. Fedora-legacy was too ambitious and everyone suffered. The last updates for FC2 are from Apr 7. The last for the other versions came out on Feb 27. Now, of course, in the open-source world, people work on what they want to work on, and its really nobody else's business. But as a user, I would as soon see CentOS focus on being a great RHEL clone, and the core essentials of providing quick and reliable updates and long term support. If the CentOS team started spreading themselves too thin I, and I'm sure others, would start to worry. CentOS is about faith in ongoing support. Not about maintaining live CD's. Leave that to Knoppix, Ubuntu, Fedora, etc. -Steve Bergman