On 6/22/07, David Chisnall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I did wonder about this a while ago (by the way, you missed Xen and > KVM in your list). As I see it, the problem is that all emulation/ > virtualisation systems can boot a LiveCD, while no real machines can > boot an emulator disk image, and most of them use incompatible > formats, making it even harder (if you pick one, then people who > prefer one of the others will complain).
We only need to support one emulator, whichever fits our purpose. The main point for LiveCD is to let people try it. Both LiveCD and emulator serves the same purpose, while emulator is easier to make and maintain. And while it is easy to make emulator disk, I image it won't be too hard to make one for each emulator if anyone wants. Again, we only need to make an official one. > > I might suggest using something like NetBSD or FreeBSD for the LiveCD > in future though, since it's much easier to start with a simple > system and add things than it is to start with a complex system and > remove things. I agree with you. A smaller distribution is better for us. Maybe we can work with GNUstep LiveCD ? Yen-Ju > > _______________________________________________ > Etoile-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-discuss > _______________________________________________ Etoile-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-discuss
