Re: preparing for a new simple-cdd release
On 12/2/06, Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@freegeek.org> wrote:
i am very happy to annouce that a version of simple-cdd that works with
etch is nearly finished. i've tested it using debian-installe RC1, and
it seems to be working fine.
http://wiki.debian.org/Simple-CDD
many thanks to Gustavo Franco (a.k.a. stratus) for doing much of the
work to get simple-cdd back in shape. thanks also to Frans Pop for help
troubleshooting debian-installer issues.
You're welcome Vagrant. Thanks for the help and motivation too!
hopefully, with a little more testing, we will see an upload to debian
soon.
Let us make clear that it seems that we've missed the Etch boat, but
stuff will be pretty much in a better shape for Lenny if us keep the
work. I'll do my best, and i need to (really).
the major new change (since the sarge-oriented version) is that it uses
a .udeb to integrate into debian-installer. this udeb is simply a
skeletal infrastructure for a CDD to select packages for installation,
do debconf preseeding/preconfiguration, and run custom post-install
scripts. you can define several profiles, with different
package/preseeding/post-install sets and select them at install time.
I simply love that. :)
feedback would definitely be appreciated. if you want to give it a try,
on an etch system:
There's a new donut for you in my branch (the splashpng stuff). I'll
add some more minor changes after i bring back my test system,
hopefully sometime soon this week.
(...)
there's a few changes i'd like to finish soon, mentioned in the TODO
file.
There's one we've ignored that is related with the default profiles
that are in our bzr branches. I've 3 profiles and of course almost all
the packages i need are listed into default.packages. You've some
profiles and just a few stuff on default.packages. Shouldn't we change
how the 'default' profile stuff works? I think it's better let the
user define if he's using a alternate 'default', got it? That way we
both can keep our default* stuff. Thoughts?
regards,
-- stratus
Reply to: