Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Ron Stodden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Guillaume, Huh? Gratitude that someone in MandrakeSoft cares enough to try and keep people outside informed. My question was addressing the big delay for your reaction to this message. I thought it had sort of a connection with the release of the final, but apparently not. Forget it. BTW, now that 7.1 is realised, and the Cooker tree is used for ongoing Cooker purposes, what is the proper formal channel for reporting problems with 7.1? We shall open a "bugzilla" system. Has it now formally shifted to Mandrake Expert (seems sensible, but it breaks continuity), or do we continue to use the Cooker mailing list (now seems stoopid)? Not so stupid for most things because Cooker is still close to the 7.1. Awaiting your answer, as I have some errors and oversights in 7.1 DrakX to report. Fill up the list. -- Guillaume Cottenceau
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Ron Stodden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: For all of you cookers out there, who wish to test our third beta [which should be closer as never to the final version..] I must apologize for the delay, and ask you to wait a little bit more, for availability of ISO image. Thank you for keeping us informed. What do you mean? -- Guillaume Cottenceau
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Ron Stodden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: BTW, now that 7.1 is realised, and the Cooker tree is used for ongoing Cooker purposes, what is the proper formal channel for reporting problems with 7.1? please please wait a few days when our bugzilla will be available. Has it now formally shifted to Mandrake Expert (seems sensible, but it breaks continuity), or do we continue to use the Cooker mailing list (now seems stoopid)? Use cooker; -- MandrakeSoft Inchttp://www.mandrakesoft.com Pasadena, CA USA --Chmouel
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: For all of you cookers out there, who wish to test our third beta [which should be closer as never to the final version..] I must apologize for the delay, and ask you to wait a little bit more, for availability of ISO image. Thank you for keeping us informed. -- Regards, Ron. [AU] - sent by Mandrake Linux.
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
David Talbot wrote: I think the rsync'ed cookers out there like to ride the bleeding edge where those of us who wait for the beta isos are looking for more of a "Ok, we've fixed the last round of bugs, now report only bugs that happen in this version." The other reason to do the rsync'ed cookers is when the beta isos' end up not being up to snuff ( lack of menus in beta2 in kde for one.) Some ideas worth thinking about: * a daily posting as to what packages have been changed. * perhaps in the beta versions the Mandrake Update tool being used for updating systems with cooker already installed. ( I belive Microsoft did this somewhat with W2K with Windows Update). We hit the servers up for the isos, burn CD's and go through the whole install just like someone who had just purchased the gold. I like mandrake's whole beta system here. They don't behave like they're rushed to push 7.1 out the door before it's ready. I think they're waiting for one of the isos to come back with 0 or near 0 bugs reported before they call it 7.1 final. Great system, M$ could take a lesson from it. I'm cool with that approach. Until it's stable I'll keep grinding my spare partition to try cooker as a clean install, then I'll replace my stable 7.0 installation when 7.1 comes out! (Please more than 1-2 servers with ISO's please) Keep Cool guys... -randy
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Submitted 23-May-00 by Fernando Perez: | | won't it work to have in the /iso directory something like | hydrogen-beta-current.iso which is in fact just a symlink to the real file, | and which gets updated as new beta versions are introduced to point to the | most up to date one? This would provide a constant name for remote rsync | users, while still allowing the Mandrake folks to keep an archive of each | beta version explicitly available. And it wouldn't cost any more in space, | since it's just a link. This sounds painfully obvious so maybe there's a good | reason why it doesn't work and I just don't see it (I don't have much | experience with rsync). Most people who use rsync use the -av options. This would preserve symlinks They would likely need to drop the -a and specify the filename to avoid a full download.(That works for me locally, but I haven't tried by remote). -- _ _|_|_ ( ) *Anton Graham /v\ / [EMAIL PROTECTED] /( )X (m_m) GPG ID: 18F78541 Penguin Powered!
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Hi, On Tue, 23 May 2000, Anton Graham wrote: Submitted 23-May-00 by Fernando Perez: | | won't it work to have in the /iso directory something like | hydrogen-beta-current.iso which is in fact just a symlink to the real file, | and which gets updated as new beta versions are introduced to point to the | most up to date one? This would provide a constant name for remote rsync | users, while still allowing the Mandrake folks to keep an archive of each | beta version explicitly available. And it wouldn't cost any more in space, | since it's just a link. This sounds painfully obvious so maybe there's a good | reason why it doesn't work and I just don't see it (I don't have much | experience with rsync). Most people who use rsync use the -av options. This would preserve symlinks They would likely need to drop the -a and specify the filename to avoid a full download.(That works for me locally, but I haven't tried by remote). How about hardlinks? They appear as regular files for everything, without the added space waste. the iso-current hardlink can be deleted and remade to point to the updated images as they appear without further disruptions. Or is there any reason why rsync wouldn't work this way? AFAIK hardlinks are indistinguishable from "real" files by anyone, and the only tell-tale sign is the reference count being 1. Just wondering if there's a simple way to implement this for the benefit of the rsync'ers and everyone's bandwidth. Regards, Fernando
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Ron Stodden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Guillaume, You have not told us the full story: 1. How did your CTO respond to the need for an addditional first stage install floppy disk image to support install from an iso file? don't know, i did not ask him the question [nor was i informed i should have?] 2. How did your CTO respond to the need for a constant single name for the most current beta iso image? This requirement is dictated to i'm not sure i understand what is your request.. -- Guillaume Cottenceau
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Hi, perhaps a dumb comment regarding the following (IMHO very good) idea: 2. How did your CTO respond to the need for a constant single name for the most current beta iso image? This requirement is dictated to i'm not sure i understand what is your request.. Repeated (it IS important!): This requirement is dictated to permit incremental download of [iso image file] changes by rsync. Without this constraint on your operations, beta-testers will be faced with a complete near 1 GB download every time the beta iso is changed, which is totally unnecessary and an enormous load on your server and its mirrors - rsync downloads only the changes within the server file and edits them into the local client file. Okay, I understand now. This is a very good idea to save bandwidth. The only problem that could stay, is that people will have less visibility on the different versions of the ISO. won't it work to have in the /iso directory something like hydrogen-beta-current.iso which is in fact just a symlink to the real file, and which gets updated as new beta versions are introduced to point to the most up to date one? This would provide a constant name for remote rsync users, while still allowing the Mandrake folks to keep an archive of each beta version explicitly available. And it wouldn't cost any more in space, since it's just a link. This sounds painfully obvious so maybe there's a good reason why it doesn't work and I just don't see it (I don't have much experience with rsync). Just an idea. Best, Fernando
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: being carbon-copied to him, on your request. Thanks! Okay, I understand now. This is a very good idea to save bandwidth. The only problem that could stay, is that people will have less visibility on the different versions of the ISO. Yes, I realise. Perhaps each set of 2 iso files (and a README?) can be in its own directory with the directory name containing version/release information. -- Regards, Ron. [AU] - sent by Mandrake Linux.
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
but you can run the script. you can't run genhdlist or genfilelist or gendeplist. - Original Message - From: "Ron Stodden" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2000 10:43 PM Subject: Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup James Ray Kenney wrote: And what if you do not have Linux on the machine you download from? Standard Windows software (eg the Adaptec utilities) can burn a CD from a tree (but be careful about Joliet vs Rock Ridge for long names). Ron.
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Vincent Danen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: FYI, I mirror the cooker hourly on my system just to keep up to date on some packages (and to help me with building RPMs). Should I just make my ISO from cooker? Is this equivalent to the current 7.1 beta? I guess I'm asking if cooker has become 7.1 beta until 7.1 final is out and it resumes cooking? If so, then life is very easy for me... =) I looked on the FTP sites and don't see anything specifically labelled as Hydrogen or 7.1 which is why I'm thinking maybe cooker is the current beta. Am I right? Actually, there is a third beta which have been made up by us last week. I think it's just a matter of hours it appears on mirrors as an ISO-image, at least this was my information from our Quality Assurance team, at the end of last week :-). Current cooker has been heavily modified since this third beta, because of i486, sparc, and alpha port, on which we're currently working. For all of you cookers out there, who wish to test our third beta [which should be closer as never to the final version..] I must apologize for the delay, and ask you to wait a little bit more, for availability of ISO image. And thanks again for the great help.. -- Guillaume Cottenceau
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: Actually, there is a third beta which have been made up by us last week. I think it's just a matter of hours it appears on mirrors as an ISO-image, at least this was my information from our Quality Assurance team, at the end of last week :-). Current cooker has been heavily modified since this third beta, because of i486, sparc, and alpha port, on which we're currently working. For all of you cookers out there, who wish to test our third beta [which should be closer as never to the final version..] I must apologize for the delay, and ask you to wait a little bit more, for availability of ISO image. Do you not realise how silly this approach is for beta testers? If you have distribution room for the 2 iso image files (which are of little direct use unless one burns two CDs, since you do NOT supply an iso.img floppy from which we can directly install or upgrade), then you have room for a distribution tree to replace it, from which those unenlightened souls who need CDs can mkisofs an iso image, and we enlightened others can use the hd.img floppy to install or upgrade from it. The only iso image file you should need to make is for the final 7.1 gold release to the CD pressing shop. We quite simply have NO need of it, and do not understand what you are on about. Until that time, as I have said before, cooker is to contain the 7.1 frozen hydrogen beta you want us to test - in accordance with Gael Duval's promise in his beta announcement. It is that simple! If you wish to work on the i486, sparc, and alpha ports without disturbing the beta, keep them in-house until they have passed their alpha tests. The beta test of them will then require additional separately-named distribution space separate from Cooker. If you phase their release, then they are different products, which implies separation. -- Regards, Ron. [AU, Mandrake Linux].
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Ron Stodden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Do you not realise how silly this approach is for beta testers? If Could you be less insultant, and more constructive? Please respect us, as we respect you. It's no use flaming us. you have distribution room for the 2 iso image files (which are of little direct use unless one burns two CDs, since you do NOT supply an iso.img floppy from which we can directly install or upgrade), then you have room for a distribution tree to replace it, from which those unenlightened souls who need CDs can mkisofs an iso image, and we enlightened others can use the hd.img floppy to install or upgrade from it. This "enlighten" stuff is only reflecting your personal thoughts. The only iso image file you should need to make is for the final 7.1 gold release to the CD pressing shop. We quite simply have NO need of it, and do not understand what you are on about. Please do not think you talk for everyone out there. It is far from being true that everyone is supporting you in your asserts. Especially in this ISO case.. I'm sorry to tell you that, but you're totally missing the point. Please list the number of people out there who think, as you, that there is definetely NO NEED for ISO's. If you can grab support from the majority of cookers, we'll rethink our behaviour upon the making of ISO's. I already tried to explain you why we do propose ISO's to Cookers. Until that time, as I have said before, cooker is to contain the 7.1 frozen hydrogen beta you want us to test - in accordance with Gael Duval's promise in his beta announcement. It is that simple! Maybe Cooker is not anymore as you wanted it to be. I'm sorry for that. If you wish to work on the i486, sparc, and alpha ports without disturbing the beta, keep them in-house until they have passed their alpha tests. The beta test of them will then require additional separately-named distribution space separate from Cooker. If you phase their release, then they are different products, which implies separation. Yes, we should do like that, you're right. There is simply not enough room for the moment, on the mirrors, to contain all the trees we would need. We can only have one Cooker at a time. Best regards, -- Guillaume Cottenceau
RE: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Actually, I can think of one reason why being able to make an ISO image is nice. I have a high speed connection and mirror Cooker (which I install from the hard drive). I then create CDs for my friends (who only have 56k modems) about once a week so that they can also play with the new beta. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ron Stodden Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2000 8:17 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Cooker] Beta Do you not realise how silly this approach is for beta testers? If you have distribution room for the 2 iso image files (which are of little direct use unless one burns two CDs, since you do NOT supply an iso.img floppy from which we can directly install or upgrade), then you have room for a distribution tree to replace it, from which those unenlightened souls who need CDs can mkisofs an iso image, and we enlightened others can use the hd.img floppy to install or upgrade from it. The only iso image file you should need to make is for the final 7.1 gold release to the CD pressing shop. We quite simply have NO need of it, and do not understand what you are on about. Until that time, as I have said before, cooker is to contain the 7.1 frozen hydrogen beta you want us to test - in accordance with Gael Duval's promise in his beta announcement. It is that simple! If you wish to work on the i486, sparc, and alpha ports without disturbing the beta, keep them in-house until they have passed their alpha tests. The beta test of them will then require additional separately-named distribution space separate from Cooker. If you phase their release, then they are different products, which implies separation. -- Regards, Ron. [AU, Mandrake Linux].
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: If you wish to work on the i486, sparc, and alpha ports without disturbing the beta, keep them in-house until they have passed their alpha tests. The beta test of them will then require additional separately-named distribution space separate from Cooker. If you phase their release, then they are different products, which implies separation. Yes, we should do like that, you're right. There is simply not enough room for the moment, on the mirrors, to contain all the trees we would need. We can only have one Cooker at a time. Take away the iso images and there is plenty of room. I do not understand your position or why you regard it as impregnable. Would you like to rethink all this? Why do it the difficult way, when the simpler way would work better? Ron.
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
James Tucker wrote: Actually, I can think of one reason why being able to make an ISO image is nice. I have a high speed connection and mirror Cooker (which I install from the hard drive). I then create CDs for my friends (who only have 56k modems) about once a week so that they can also play with the new beta. But, since you have the disk space, it would be very easy for you to run mkisofs via the Mandrake-published script to create the iso images from the tree and then you would not have to download both the tree and the iso. -- Regards, Ron. [AU, Mandrake Linux].
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Some people want ISO's to install on computers that dont' have network connections. Some people want ISO's because they don't have space to mirror cooker all the time, (or the bandwidth to get updates all the time) but do have the space to download the iso's temporarily and then burn and delete them. Some people feel installing from CD is faster and easier that either network or HD installs. There are less steps, and less setup before the install actually begins. Not everyone already has a linux box setup where they can mkisofs the iso images, and so far, the iso image script doesn't work anyways. If I didn't already have a linux box, and I wanted to test ISO install, without ISO's i'd be SOL. Your opinion is NOT the opinion of all cookers (i like that term :)) And you shouldn't force it on us. The ISO's are a good way for many more people to test cooker, and for other people to switch to cooker from windows. - Original Message - From: "Ron Stodden" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2000 9:15 AM Subject: Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: If you wish to work on the i486, sparc, and alpha ports without disturbing the beta, keep them in-house until they have passed their alpha tests. The beta test of them will then require additional separately-named distribution space separate from Cooker. If you phase their release, then they are different products, which implies separation. Yes, we should do like that, you're right. There is simply not enough room for the moment, on the mirrors, to contain all the trees we would need. We can only have one Cooker at a time. Take away the iso images and there is plenty of room. I do not understand your position or why you regard it as impregnable. Would you like to rethink all this? Why do it the difficult way, when the simpler way would work better? Ron.
RE: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Actually, that's what I'm doing. I may have misunderstood what you were saying in your earlier message. I thought that you were saying that ever creating a beta ISO was silly and unnecessary. I agree that it pointless to download both the tree and the ISO. The only time I've ever wanted to d/l an ISO instead of mirroring is when mirroring is not an option (such as when I'm at work on a T1 and all the machines are running Windows NT). -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ron Stodden Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2000 10:22 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup James Tucker wrote: Actually, I can think of one reason why being able to make an ISO image is nice. I have a high speed connection and mirror Cooker (which I install from the hard drive). I then create CDs for my friends (who only have 56k modems) about once a week so that they can also play with the new beta. But, since you have the disk space, it would be very easy for you to run mkisofs via the Mandrake-published script to create the iso images from the tree and then you would not have to download both the tree and the iso. -- Regards, Ron. [AU, Mandrake Linux].
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
- Original Message - From: "David Foresman" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2000 10:26 AM Subject: Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup Some people want ISO's to install on computers that dont' have network connections. Some people want ISO's because they don't have space to mirror cooker all the time, (or the bandwidth to get updates all the time) but do have the space to download the iso's temporarily and then burn and delete them. My buddies with T1's at work will download for me and burn a CD - using an iso saves them time and effort and is easier for them because of their firewall restrictions (they tell me - I don't know. I'm just grateful for their help. I can't wait until I get cable modem access in 6 months). Hoyt
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
On 21 May 2000, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: Should I just make my ISO from cooker? Is this equivalent to the current 7.1 beta? I guess I'm asking if cooker has become 7.1 beta until 7.1 final is out and it resumes cooking? Actually, there is a third beta which have been made up by us last week. I think it's just a matter of hours it appears on mirrors as an ISO-image, at least this was my information from our Quality Assurance team, at the end of last week :-). Hmmm... well, I downloaded the ISO's from tucows 2 days ago and they were still dated May 3. Current cooker has been heavily modified since this third beta, because of i486, sparc, and alpha port, on which we're currently working. So to test 7.1 I should hunt down beta 3 and not use Cooker then? For all of you cookers out there, who wish to test our third beta [which should be closer as never to the final version..] I must apologize for the delay, and ask you to wait a little bit more, for availability of ISO image. And thanks again for the great help.. Easy enough. I'll hang tight a little bit then. =) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED], OpenPGP key available on www.keyserver.net Freezer Burn BBS: telnet://bbs.freezer-burn.org . ICQ: 54924721 Webmaster for the Linux Portal Site Freezer Burn: http://www.freezer-burn.org
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Ron Stodden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: If you wish to work on the i486, sparc, and alpha ports without disturbing the beta, keep them in-house until they have passed their alpha tests. The beta test of them will then require additional separately-named distribution space separate from Cooker. If you phase their release, then they are different products, which implies separation. Yes, we should do like that, you're right. There is simply not enough room for the moment, on the mirrors, to contain all the trees we would need. We can only have one Cooker at a time. Take away the iso images and there is plenty of room. Unfortunately we have only a limited number of mirrors which handle our ISO's, you probably noticed that. I do not understand your position or why you regard it as impregnable. Would you like to rethink all this? Why do it the difficult way, when the simpler way would work better? I'm sorry, I don't understand what you're proposing? -- Guillaume Cottenceau
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Vincent Danen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On 21 May 2000, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: Should I just make my ISO from cooker? Is this equivalent to the current 7.1 beta? I guess I'm asking if cooker has become 7.1 beta until 7.1 final is out and it resumes cooking? Actually, there is a third beta which have been made up by us last week. I think it's just a matter of hours it appears on mirrors as an ISO-image, at least this was my information from our Quality Assurance team, at the end of last week :-). Hmmm... well, I downloaded the ISO's from tucows 2 days ago and they were still dated May 3. Yep. New one very soon to be mirrored, our CTO confirmed it to me today. Current cooker has been heavily modified since this third beta, because of i486, sparc, and alpha port, on which we're currently working. So to test 7.1 I should hunt down beta 3 and not use Cooker then? Yep, definitely. The cooker by now is "forked" from the future final 7.1 -- Guillaume Cottenceau
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Date sent: Mon, 22 May 2000 00:22:00 +1000 From: Ron Stodden [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: Facts and Rules To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] James Tucker wrote: Actually, I can think of one reason why being able to make an ISO image is nice. I have a high speed connection and mirror Cooker (which I install from the hard drive). I then create CDs for my friends (who only have 56k modems) about once a week so that they can also play with the new beta. But, since you have the disk space, it would be very easy for you to run mkisofs via the Mandrake-published script to create the iso images from the tree and then you would not have to download both the tree and the iso. SNIP And what if you do not have Linux on the machine you download from? I do not have the HD space to install linux on my work machine right now(and Linux does not support the TokenRing cards we use either!) I do not even know if linux supports the Printerport CDBurner that I have at work either. -BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- Version: 2.6.2 mQCNAzDGh+IAAAEEALtoCTrqvHd8tCifWK8hXwqdZuvbWOZOPo8RWKUm697HLOMr T5yfr40LaoZpCgec/ErcPJlOoZ3Ok1d5J8K/xrl8U7t+mNag00VMpmz/AfRhsPnQ +iVcTvtcw+opIoO++Ei4LiY/99H+5raPnTe7icucTkYKdxyAqJT7hiQSTfy1AAUR tCJKYW1lcyBSYXkgS2VubmV5IDxqa2VubmV5QHNhdC5uZXQ+iQCVAwUQMPYvf5T7 hiQSTfy1AQEY6QQAhHGkbKDE7rGaQ5t/KdgeobCmIv6UWT/YKr1n49Tjl8P8Ntr1 16BWocObvAWESiunutYHqiy7She5ncP3PlOs39VuBdw6Nr9ehu6tblufOyiHeZN6 T6qJUwWpDXqDJDf1ecS+2QgVWsx7Qt4b6TyB1C0zMTtq2/encVHWOQ5PU70= =TcJB -END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Date sent: Sun, 21 May 2000 22:16:43 +1000 From: Ron Stodden [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: Facts and Rules To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: Actually, there is a third beta which have been made up by us last week. I think it's just a matter of hours it appears on mirrors as an ISO-image, at least this was my information from our Quality Assurance team, at the end of last week :-). Current cooker has been heavily modified since this third beta, because of i486, sparc, and alpha port, on which we're currently working. For all of you cookers out there, who wish to test our third beta [which should be closer as never to the final version..] I must apologize for the delay, and ask you to wait a little bit more, for availability of ISO image. Do you not realise how silly this approach is for beta testers? If you have distribution room for the 2 iso image files (which are of little direct use unless one burns two CDs, since you do NOT supply an iso.img floppy from which we can directly install or upgrade), then you have room for a distribution tree to replace it, from which those unenlightened souls who need CDs can mkisofs an iso image, and we enlightened others can use the hd.img floppy to install or upgrade from it. SNIP ROOM is not the problem...Some of us have high-speed net access on diferent machines than the ones we need to test cooker on. The machine I test cooker on only has a 57K modem, but I have access to T1 and burner at work, and DSL and burner at friends house. Distribution tree does no good if you cannot get it to the machine you wish to install it to(or at least on the same network.) i could burn 2 CD's and copy them to the HD but then why not just use an ISO. Also, with an ISO, you do not have to worry about having gotton the tree during the middle of dependant package updating and have mis-matched packages that have dependancy problems during install. James -BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- Version: 2.6.2 mQCNAzDGh+IAAAEEALtoCTrqvHd8tCifWK8hXwqdZuvbWOZOPo8RWKUm697HLOMr T5yfr40LaoZpCgec/ErcPJlOoZ3Ok1d5J8K/xrl8U7t+mNag00VMpmz/AfRhsPnQ +iVcTvtcw+opIoO++Ei4LiY/99H+5raPnTe7icucTkYKdxyAqJT7hiQSTfy1AAUR tCJKYW1lcyBSYXkgS2VubmV5IDxqa2VubmV5QHNhdC5uZXQ+iQCVAwUQMPYvf5T7 hiQSTfy1AQEY6QQAhHGkbKDE7rGaQ5t/KdgeobCmIv6UWT/YKr1n49Tjl8P8Ntr1 16BWocObvAWESiunutYHqiy7She5ncP3PlOs39VuBdw6Nr9ehu6tblufOyiHeZN6 T6qJUwWpDXqDJDf1ecS+2QgVWsx7Qt4b6TyB1C0zMTtq2/encVHWOQ5PU70= =TcJB -END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
On 21 May 2000, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: Hmmm... well, I downloaded the ISO's from tucows 2 days ago and they were still dated May 3. Yep. New one very soon to be mirrored, our CTO confirmed it to me today. Awesome. I'll snag them as soon as they're available then. So to test 7.1 I should hunt down beta 3 and not use Cooker then? Yep, definitely. The cooker by now is "forked" from the future final 7.1 Gotchya. Thanks for the info. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED], OpenPGP key available on www.keyserver.net Freezer Burn BBS: telnet://bbs.freezer-burn.org . ICQ: 54924721 Webmaster for the Linux Portal Site Freezer Burn: http://www.freezer-burn.org
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Ron Stodden wrote: Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: Actually, there is a third beta which have been made up by us last week. I think it's just a matter of hours it appears on mirrors as an ISO-image, at least this was my information from our Quality Assurance team, at the end of last week :-). Current cooker has been heavily modified since this third beta, because of i486, sparc, and alpha port, on which we're currently working. For all of you cookers out there, who wish to test our third beta [which should be closer as never to the final version..] I must apologize for the delay, and ask you to wait a little bit more, for availability of ISO image. Do you not realise how silly this approach is for beta testers? I can make CDs and Install from them on several machines, but I cannot for many reasons follow the rsync/burn/test cycle. For one thing, I cannot keep the space tied up on the machines here--I have to burn it to CD as soon as DL is finished, then clear the space for other operations, and restore the files I took off from CD backups. Obviously, I can DL an iso only on weekends. I have the space on my personal machines but a connection that tops out at about 20K when I am lucky, and dies often. If you have distribution room for the 2 iso image files (which are of little direct use unless one burns two CDs, since you do NOT supply an iso.img floppy from which we can directly install or upgrade), then you have room for a distribution tree to replace it, from which those unenlightened souls who need CDs can mkisofs an iso image, and we enlightened others can use the hd.img floppy to install or upgrade from it. The only iso image file you should need to make is for the final 7.1 gold release to the CD pressing shop. We quite simply have NO need of it, and do not understand what you are on about. Until that time, as I have said before, cooker is to contain the 7.1 frozen hydrogen beta you want us to test - in accordance with Gael Duval's promise in his beta announcement. It is that simple! No, it isn't that simple. The whole idea of alpha, beta, and software development was a MADE UP thing, created from the minds of academics as their best GUESS at what process fitted a certain situation. I am not trying to denigrate their efforts at finding some form in the chaos, just trying to place them in perspective. Now we have two differences that must be considered. Alpha, Beta, etc. were created as concepts at a time when this open testing process was unthinkable except as a castle in the air. And it was designed for a COMMERCIAL software development process, the type that Microsoft does, in fact. I have said it before, and I will say it again here. We have no data to support that one process produces faster, better code than another. In God we trust, all others bring data. Arguments from logic (authority) or "this is the way it's done" (tradition) mean little when we should be comparing the results and timelines of the various processes, calculating process capabilities, and examining special causes. But we aren't even there, yet. First we would have to agree on what to measure. That could be achieved through a process called imagineering--designing a system as if things were perfect then engineering it back to earth. Obviously one criterion would be/should be the comfort level of beta testers, including you. (That is, if we discover that an equivalent of a beta cycle is a desirable feature of a system.) What I am trying to say, Ron, is that we never, as a human species, took a scientific approach to optimizing software development. We have operated on theories propounded from logic, authority and tradition without evidence, mainly on the basis that order is better than chaos, and educed a theory that fits a model of development we aren't even following in several of its precursor conditions. I will support an open forum to find something better than what we do now, but I am not willing to concede at this point that anyone has a good handle on what that might be. Civileme If you wish to work on the i486, sparc, and alpha ports without disturbing the beta, keep them in-house until they have passed their alpha tests. The beta test of them will then require additional separately-named distribution space separate from Cooker. If you phase their release, then they are different products, which implies separation. I agree with that statement and hope they are doing this only because they have space problems, as I do. -- Regards, Ron. [AU, Mandrake Linux].
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Yep, definitely. The cooker by now is "forked" from the future final 7.1 OK, where is the new "Forked" 7.1 tree for me to continue mirroring, I would rather the non-iso my self - give me the bleeding edge. :) -- +++ Allen Bolderoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] LNC - Linux, help and commentary http://linux.netnerve.com CTPC - Caffeine - get it here: http://www.coffee-tea-pots-cups.com/ +++ GPG fingerprint = CBB0 8626 702C 3D01 B5AD A54A DC2C 93B7 3E4B 6472 +++
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
James Ray Kenney wrote: And what if you do not have Linux on the machine you download from? Standard Windows software (eg the Adaptec utilities) can burn a CD from a tree (but be careful about Joliet vs Rock Ridge for long names). Ron.
Re: [Cooker] Beta2 ISOs: followup
Civileme, Thanks for the illumination, but I venture to slightly expand upon it inline in square brackets below. By way of general background, I would add that Linus Torvalds is on record as saying "The best management is no management", and presumably he manages the kernel by that dictum.Does it work? The jury is not in yet. There are many kernel bugs which would not be there if it was managed by some all-knowing, all-seeing, all-aware person.In the case of distributed voluntary development using the internet, and using people of the highest calibre and responsibility (ie with the professional mindset - other than in the matter of compensation), I agree that it has the potential of producing the best result. But there still remains the question of testing, and I do not know how Linus manages (aha!) that. Civileme wrote: No, it isn't that simple. The whole idea of alpha, beta, and software development [gamma testing is critical as well] was a MADE UP thing, created from the minds of academics as their best GUESS at what process fitted a certain situation. [The concept has long since drifted from academia into productive use in commercial developments, and, as verified by my personal experience in many of them, reaped wonderful dividends, indicating that it is at least proximate to the ideal process] I am not trying to denigrate their efforts at finding some form in the chaos, just trying to place them in perspective. Now we have two differences that must be considered. Alpha, Beta, etc. were created as concepts at a time when this open testing process was unthinkable except as a castle in the air. And it was designed for a COMMERCIAL software development process, the type that Microsoft does, in fact. I have said it before, and I will say it again here. We have no data to support that one process produces faster, better code than another. [but we do have ample evidence that some such process produces better code than no process] In God we trust, all others bring data. Arguments from logic (authority) or "this is the way it's done" (tradition) mean little when we should be comparing the results and timelines of the various processes, calculating process capabilities, and examining special causes. But we aren't even there, yet. First we would have to agree on what to measure. That could be achieved through a process called imagineering--designing a system as if things were perfect then engineering it back to earth. Obviously one criterion would be/should be the comfort level of beta testers, including you. (That is, if we discover that an equivalent of a beta cycle is a desirable feature of a system.) What I am trying to say, Ron, is that we never, as a human species, took a scientific approach to optimizing software development. We have operated on theories propounded from logic, authority and tradition without evidence, [don't agree] mainly on the basis that order is better than chaos, and educed a theory that fits a model of development we aren't even following in several of its precursor conditions. [agreed] I will support an open forum to find something better than what we do now, but I am not willing to concede at this point that anyone has a good handle on what that might be. [which is not a reason not to proceed with the best that we yet know] -- Regards, Ron. [AU, Mandrake Linux].
