[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Daily build netinst documentation



I'm planning to install wheezy using netinstall, but not always wanting to use
"cutting edge" daily installer build (or is it required at this stage of
wheezy cycle?).

http://www.debian.org/CD/netinst/   ...links to:
http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/  ...that offers downloads
with "installer build from sid"

What's the difference between "installer build from wheezy" and "installer
build from sid"?
You should tell what ""wheezy" uses the last known-good d-i image from the archive
(aka squeeze release at the moment)." means.
Does it use old squeeze kernel during install (2.6.32) or wheezy (3.x) and has it any
new features compared to squeeze installer (apart that it installs wheezy by
default)?

quote from http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/daily-builds/
---
What are the daily builds?

These images are produced regularly, normally twice daily but this may
change from time to time. There are multiple CDs built in each run:

    * "wheezy" businesscard for each arch except s390 (small image, no
    * packages - just contains d-i)
    * "wheezy" netinst for each arch except s390 (slightly larger image, d-i
    * and the base system only)
    * "sid" businesscard (as above)
    * "sid" netinst (as above) 

The "wheezy" and "sid" versions determine the version of d-i used in each
case. "wheezy" uses the last known-good d-i image from the archive (aka
squeeze release at the moment). "sid" uses the latest build from the porters
for each architecture.

The "daily", "daily.new" and "daily.old" links below are just symlinks to
wheezy_d-i and sid_d-i as appropriate (for convenience). Within each
directory, you'll find the last 6 builds labelled by date and build number
within that day. There are more symlinks provided too: "current" points to
the last build that was done; "arch-latest" points to the last successful CD
build for each architecture. (NOTE: that's not a guarantee that the CDs are
useful, just that the build script did not fail!).
---


Reply to: