Brian composed on 2016-03-16 20:49 (UTC):
On Wed 16 Mar 2016 at 16:12:20 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
Brian composed on 2016-03-16 19:21 (UTC):
>Why any Debian user should use an antiquated technology to install is >beyond me. USB sticks are two a penny. Isohybrid images rule; OK!
USB sticks, being of a non-uniform variety of sizes, shapes, speed, and reliability, are a pain to library. Inferior amount of space on which to write on them contributes to the library problem. Pricing of USB sticks on a per device basis remains much higher than OM, making creation of a single device for single purpose generally much more expensive than OM. There still exist working puters that cannot boot USB. I have several.
So do I. There are ways round it.
Around which do you refer to with "it"?
A round shiny disc could be her only solution to booting a Debian image.
Of course.
Not that I routinely burn OM to install Linux. For that I usually don't burn anything, instead installing by loading an installation kernel and initrd with an already installed bootloader. HTTP installation means up-to-date at the outset.
This makes installing Debian straightforward for everyone?
I wasn't suggesting anything about straightforward, just providing some context based on how things go around here. My installations are far more often pre-releases, so discs burned from isos would infrequently get repeated use. A lot of time would be wasted downloading isos full of never-to-be-installed packages instead of downloading needed packages that might be replaced on the mirrors even before the package completes downloading.
Compared with just putting an image on a USB stick?
With the result that the installation is already fully up-to-date when the installation process exits?
Lots of ways to skin these Linux cats. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/