Re: Proposal: switch default desktop to xfce
- To: email@example.com
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Proposal: switch default desktop to xfce
- From: Steve McIntyre <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 22:09:30 +0000
- Message-id: <[🔎] E1VbdxC-00016s-L2@mail.einval.com>
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <20131024154048.GB26684@einval.com> <20131024165246.GD16794@sid.nuvreauspam> <20131024165246.GD16794@sid.nuvreauspam> <E1VZgXz-0008PX-Em@mail.einval.com> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>The last time I used the full stack of CDs where there was no decent
>alternative option was when I was helping a customer prepare a set of
>installation instructions for a code escrow situation.
>Since one of the requirements there was the ability to produce a 100%
>bit-for-bit equal system, anything that used "download the current
>version from the Internet" was out -- we had to provide actual media
>(CDs, at the time).
>That was over five years ago, though. Today, I doubt I'd still try to
>use CDs, probably at least DVDs instead.
Yup, that's what I'm thinking too.
>Having said that, I do think that providing a limited number of CD
>install images is useful for those cases of retrocomputing where
>installing off DVD is difficult. Other than that...
So... In that situation, would you care about having more than just a
netinst available for initial booting? Beyond that, people can get on
the network to a mirror, or to other machines hosting the DVD images.
I'm thinking we can cut down some more here. Maybe (as Steven
suggested) we could keep a single bigger CD image around, but I'm not
100% convinced that it's likely to give us enough beyond the netinst
to make me care about it. What else would we want/need on a CD to make
it compelling here?
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. email@example.com
Support the Campaign for Audiovisual Free Expression: http://www.eff.org/cafe/