Re: Redesign of cdimage website

[LarstiQ <larstiq@larstiq.dyndns.org>]

On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 11:35:17PM +0000, Philip Hands wrote:

<snip>

> Should we be aiming at "as small an image as is useful" or "as much
> useful stuff as we can fit on a business card CD" ?
> 
> I tend to prefer something that would double as a reasonable rescue
> CD, with a few extra tools on it, and with the possibility of booting
> into a ram disk based system with bash and ssh available, at least.
> 
> Thoughts?

Well, a rescue cd like the one Linuxcare provides might not be a bad
idea, but what I really love about the current afloat netinstall isos
are that they are really small, I can point people to one and say,
"Look, just burn that 35 mb iso and download what you need after that
with apt, instead of downloading 6 isos you will likely not need".
As has been said, floppies are just to cumbersome for most people,
so "as small an image as is useful" would be my first choice if there is
a choice to be made (not sure how feasible 2 extra isos would be).

> > o how much disk space are we talking about ?  should it meet some
> >   particular standard so it can be reused (e.g CreditCard isos ?)
> 
> I think it should certainly be no bigger than CreditCard iso size, and
> probably smaller, since most people will not want it for that, but
> just to quickly burn onto a CD and start a net install.
> 
> Maybe we should do 2.  The smallest possible useful net-install CD,
> and the most useful possible CreditCard iso.  They're both going to be
> pretty small, so space isn't much of an issue, just deciding what
> needs to go on them.

For the smallest one, I think bf and base would make sense, maybe with
an adjusted basedebs.tgz, for the larger one, have a look at how other
people are doing this ?

LarstiQ