30 Mar
2011
30 Mar
'11
9:42 a.m.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Aleksey Bragin <aleksey(a)reactos.org> wrote:
If you download from http://iso.reactos.org/ it is
stored as a 7z
file. You will notice the livecd is smaller than the bootcd.
In-fact by roughly 10mb smaller. So by your logic you would prefer my
solution. Though for users they would probably prefer a raw iso.
Though they also wouldn't be downloading 10 a day.
I don't know if the build time is talking about the merging of discs.
There shouldn't be any added build time. for one you save time because
you do not have to compress the files into a cab. You would also save
time because you wouldn't have to build 2 types of discs. Though these
are not really build times. It's just moving the already built files
into directories and then turning them into an iso.
Though if it's about building the livecd installer application. you
already build an unfinished version of it.
I would really like some feedback soon because this will be my google
summer of code proposal.(well part of it anyway)
On Mar 30, 2011, at 9:16 AM, Andrew Green wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean. My plan is still to have
the text based
install, aswell as livecd. all the bootcd has at the moment is the
text based installer and install files in a cab.
Advantages
-Only build and maintain one cd.
-Saves space on server(not having to build and save 2 discs)
-No confusion about what cd someone installed from.
There is no (easy) way to install ReactOS without using bootcd, so it's
really the only option. -Simple to implement as opposed to a ram disk. to
install everything
to from a cab.
Disadvantages
-To download an iso to just install will be larger(A compressed
version could counter this. Though it's not ideal)
Even additional 10Mb would become 100Mb when regress testing just 10
revisions. There are many people (myself included) who don't have high-speed
connection all the time too.