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

Re: Burning a .raw file...

On Thu, 2002-04-18 at 10:54, Richard Atterer wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 02:54:47PM +1000, jason andrade wrote:
> > On Thu, 18 Apr 2002, Siddhu wrote:
> > > your Faq about the iso burning does not answer, how to burn a .raw
> > > file.
> > 
> > a .raw file is exactly the same as a .iso file and can be burned in
> > the same way.
> Rather than changing the FAQ, shouldn't we change the extension to be
> ".iso" for all images?
> ".raw" is really unusual, I've never encountered it elsewhere. And as
> we can see from this question, the inconsistency of using 2 different
> extensions for the same thing just leads to confusion.

I like the fact that .iso extension is used for the released images, and
only the released images, on the master site.

Of course, that point is moot when the images cease to exist on the
master site, and are only present as jigdos that generate .iso files,
but the fact that the files under potato-test are not .iso files
hopefully acts as a "I don't think we're in Kansas any more" hint to
people that should be in the versioned directory

Cheers, Phil.
Say no to software patents!  http://petition.eurolinux.org/

|)|  Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560]    http://www.hands.com/
|-|  HANDS.COM Ltd.                    http://www.uk.debian.org/
|(|  10 Onslow Gardens, South Woodford, London  E18 1NE  ENGLAND

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: