From: Dimitris T. <dj...@sl...> - 2014-10-23 22:21:40
|
On Fri, 24 Oct 2014 00:37:17 +0300 (EEST) George Vlahavas <vla...@gm...> wrote: > I'm sorry, but this is wrong. > > We cannot have one boot manager when installed from a standard > installation iso and then another when installed from a live iso. > we could since elilo is limited. We used grub in the old live isos. But it is simple to prepare a live iso with elilo menus since they has been tested. In this case menus will have limited choises up to 15 and user has to type to boot e.g. with persistence or acpi=off. elilo menus are ungly. > In general, we don't want to get to have cases like "you get A if you > install from the standard iso and B if you install from live". Where > does it stop? An installation from live should be identical to a > standard installation as much as possible. > > I'm already perplexed as to why avahi and remmina are present in the > live iso. I know it was like that in previous live isos (in 13.37) as > well, but that's no excuse really and these are also cases where live > differs from standard and it shouldn't. If people think that we > should have that in a Salix installation, then we should also have > them in a standard installation, not only live. This is a decision > for Salix in general, not specific to live and it should be made > before the next salix release (14.2 or whatever). > i think remina is useful. avahi is mabe need i have to see it. If they can be removed why not. > *If* we move to grub, that has to be done for the standard iso first > (in our next release) and then live should just follow. This is a > decision to make for the distribution in general. It's not a decision > that has to be made separately for live. And as far as I remember, > there was already a discussion about lilo+elilo/grub before releasing > 14.1 and we ended up deciding that we should stick to the same ones > as slackware. Once again, this is a discussion for the next release. > > Otherwise, the feeling I'm getting is that Salix is a random mashup > of different software. Should it be? > the only difference is the boot loader everything else is the same, lists are the same except live list need for live. Again just tell me to prepare a live with elilo since bash flash-plugin latest versions are included in iso images. > On Thu, 23 Oct 2014, Dimitris Tzemos wrote: > > > > > Live ISO images > > 32-bit (i686): > > (size: 761 MB, md5sum: 62ae4691c92ec866c659331d63d729c7) > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/salix/files/14.1/salixlive-xfce-14.1-beta3.iso/download > > > > 64-bit (x86_64): > > (size: 779 MB, md5sum: bca6490913f75ee86027878eec6cfb54) > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/salix/files/14.1/salixlive64-xfce-14.1-beta3.iso/download > > > > iso images boot on syslinux and after installation grub installed. > > This has been tested on 32 bit (boot from usb, installation to hd) > > I dont know on uefi boot if grub enabled. > > This need test from users having uefi system. > > > > > > SLI 1.2.1 has now a progress bar and install grub. > > > > Thanks for testing > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > > Salix-main mailing list > > Sal...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/salix-main > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Salix-main mailing list > Sal...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/salix-main |