[CentOS-devel] LiveCD development

Scott Silva ssilva at sgvwater.com
Fri May 1 23:35:08 UTC 2009


on 5-1-2009 12:34 PM Ned Slider spake the following:
> Dag Wieers wrote:
>> On Fri, 1 May 2009, Marcus Moeller wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Dag,
>>>
>>>> I am amazed by the usefulness of the CentOS LiveCD and I would like to
>>>> discuss the scope of the project. Some of the recommendations I made
>>>> go against the original idea of LiveCD project.
>>>>
>>>> But my (outside) stance on the LiveCD is that it should give the best
>>>> achievable experience possible for people when trying CentOS. To me that
>>>> includes adding drivers that are available in other repositories (which
>>>> are missing from upstream, including wireless firmware, etc...)
>>>>
>>>> I do agree that as soon as we leave the deliver-what-upstream-has path, we
>>>> may open a can of worms (do we also want to fix known bugs ? replace
>>>> upstream software ? legality ?), so we have to decide what is desirable,
>>>> what is possible and where the project's effort ends.
>>> I don't think that there is a need to divide from upstream atm. and am
>>> not really willed to break compatibility for features.
>>>
>>> Concerning the Live-CD, I would suggest to offer a stable version that
>>> reflects the CentOS release with all dis-advantages it may have (not
>>> installable, e.g.)
>> So it becomes effectively useless for everyone with a netbook/laptop and 
>> needs wireless ? I cannot use the LiveCD unless I somehow transfer the 
>> firmware (or remake the LiveCD), you loose users, hurt the project.
>>
>> Upstream doesn't have a LiveCD, so I don't see a good point in maintaining 
>> the same hardware support in that respect. It only hurts the LiveCD 
>> effort. (Same for additional drivers for netbooks/laptops/desktops)
>>
>> What's even more, upstream does have wireless firmware in their addon 
>> repository, so in effect we are not offering the same as they are offering 
>> to customers.
>>
> 
> +1.
> 
> The only reason I can see for sticking religiously with the 
> upstream/CentOS base is to use the LiveCD as a tool to test hardware 
> compatibility. IMHO that's a lost opportunity as others have noted and a 
> LiveCD deserves to be so much more than just that. Besides, we all 
> install additional drivers on our real systems when hardware isn't 
> detected or supported by the base offering - just that's somewhat more 
> difficult using a LiveCD which by it's nature is intended (in many users 
> opinion) to be quick and easy to use, not more difficult. We will likely 
> just lose that potential userbase to Ubuntu.
> 
> I appreciate this IS a difficult call as when you add functionality you 
> also lose the ability to use it as a strict testing tool for out of the 
> box distro compatibility. Is there any way we can have the best of both 
> worlds?
Unless it could have 2 sets of kernels and initrd's. One bone stock, and one
"Enhanced" with extra drivers.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 258 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20090501/bb59cac1/attachment.bin 


More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list