Re: another attempt to use hamm disks
Enrique Zanardi <ezanardi@molec2.dfis.ull.es> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 03, 1998 at 09:56:32AM -0800, David Welton wrote:
> > In the same vein as Bruce's previous 'why dont we use rpm', why don't
> > we take a look at Redhat's boot disks?
> We do. We are using the same toolkit for ours! ;-)
> [...]
Yes, but we have Bruce's "busybox" program... (Do they know about it?)
> > Would it be feasible to modify their disks to do what we need them to?
> > Or would all the hacking necessary make it too much work?
> I plan to have a look at how have they done some things (Partition Druid,
> autodetection of hardware...) to improve our boot disks in future
> versions. I don't know enough about their disks yet to say if we could
> simply use them or how difficult would it be, but I'm sure we have some
> pretty good stuff in our boot disks that doesn't deserve to be wasted
> without stronger reasons.
There install script is written in C, and uses their librpm.a (which
is rather nice, BTW). The Debian install script, written in bash,
feels a little more "accessable" to me, but there is no reason we
can't borrow bits of code, and turn them into command line utilities
(using bash to string them together).
One nice thing about their disks is that they can install from the
pcmcia (and the network). In the future, I'd like to see the ability
in Debian to load base.tgz over the network. (If disk size is an
issue, a simple protocol like tftp would suffice.)
Steve
dunham@cps.msu.edu
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: