Re: Live System images and Pure Blends
El 24/7/22 a las 13:02, Stefan Kropp escribió: # Rescue Disk Image An image for a live system to rescues a broken system. It may have a set of useful tool, but may not have a X-Server. Powerful editor, maybe also gnu compilers and manpages and screen / tmux. This is not just a 'small' Rescue Disk Image this will be a real powerful Debian system (without X). 1) What you describe (with gnu compilers and manpages) seems work like a Developer edition Image more than a Rescue Disk Image. 2) It's true as Roland Clobus says that there are some Debian-derivatives doing a good job. GRML, MXLinux and Rescatux (This is my own project ;) .) are some of them. 3) Rescatux is a Rescue Disk Image with a graphical UI (by design). ( https://www.rescatux.org ) 3.1) So once I manage to push all of my improvements to Debian live-build and live-boot I might be able to work on something similar to Rescatux by creating a: live-task-rescue-graphical meta-package. I plan to upgrade Rescatux so that it's based on Bookworm before Bookworm is frozen/released (with the associated patches that I might send to improve live-build and live-boot). So you can discard me providing a live-task-rescue-graphical meta-package before Bookwrom is frozen/released. 3.2) Part of live-task-rescue-graphical would be submitting rescapp program to Debian so that it's an official package. I already build myself as a Debian package. https://github.com/rescatux/rescapp https://github.com/rescatux/rescapp/tree/v0.57 https://github.com/rescatux/rescapp/tree/v0.57-debian If anyone is interested on doing this for Bookworm please contact me. 4) If you want to work on a live-task-rescue package please check the current package selection for Rescatux just in case it's useful for you: https://github.com/rescatux/rescatux/blob/v0.74/rescatux_common_packages Currently I'm focused on adding multi-vendor Secure Boot support for Super Grub2 Disk (another of my projects) so it may take a while till I interact with you guys regarding live-build and live-boot. adrian15
Re: Live System images and Pure Blends
Hello Stefan,
On 24/07/2022 13:02, Stefan Kropp wrote:
I have been started to look into live system generation
(live-build), Be honest, I have never been used a Debian Live CD.
Few days/weeks back I looked into the live CD which are provided
by Debian (live-wrapper).
Your timing is rather unfortunate. At the moment there are no recent
(i.e. bookworm/sid) live images being generated and the snapshot server
that I use to generate them was shut down during DebConf22.
However, yesterday I updated the script to generate live-build-based
images such that can be run without a snapshot server.
See the recently updated Wiki page
(https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleInstalls/LiveImages) in the section
'Building'
I also think, it is very important to provide live-systems also
for the next releases.
I'm working on that, but it needs more time.
I have been looked into:
* debian-live-11.4.0-amd64-standard.iso (1,1G / 800 packages)
* debian-live-11.4.0-amd64-xfce.iso (2,5G / 2270 packages)
* debian-live-11.4.0-amd64-gnome.iso (2,7G / 2572 packages)
The live-build sid-based GNOME image is now 3.2GB / 2540 packages
You could download a recent GNOME live image from openQA:
https://openqa.debian.net/tests/65162/asset/iso/gnome_sid_20220711T17Zdeb.iso
The tests that running are at:
https://openqa.debian.net/tests/overview?distri=debian&version=sid&build=20220711T17Z_sid&groupid=14
I'm wondering if we should refine those images. Maybe the Debian
Project and the users can benefit from it.
These images use the meta-package 'live-task-' to select which
packages belong to each desktop. E.g live-task-gnome depends on
task-gnome-desktop. Any adjustment can take place in these meta-packages.
One of the live images is called "standard". What does standard
means? What can the user do with the "standard" image?
The standard image does not contain a graphical desktop. It could have
been called 'text' as well.
I looked
into xfce and gnome. The gnome image also includes few games,
evolution and thunderbird. xfce doesn't have a mailclient at all.
You might want to report a bug against live-task-xfce or
task-xfce-desktop to add a mail client.
I think one person at the BoF said, it's not necessary to build a
image for every desktop manager. Personally, I agree.
For the record, that was Mrfai.
While my time is still limited, I will also (have to) focus on a few
images at first.
I asked myself:
* Who will use the live system?
* Why will somebody use the live system?
* When should we provide a Debian Pure Blend?
Who will use the live system? Everybody!
Why will somebody use the live system? Everything!
It may helpful we the project defines some images with a scope.
Maybe something like this,..
# Rescue Disk Image
An image for a live system to rescues a broken system. It may
have a set of useful tool, but may not have a X-Server. Powerful
editor, maybe also gnu compilers and manpages and screen / tmux.
This is not just a 'small' Rescue Disk Image this will be a real
powerful Debian system (without X).
I don't want to discourage you, but there are already several
Debian-derivatives that do a good job. Also the Debian-installer (from
the boot menu) has some rescue capability (not tried by me yet)
# Calamares-Installer
Live System to provide the Calamares-Installer. The live system
can be used to install Debian with Calamares.
(I haven't used it - I can not give much feedback, yet)
The Calamares installer is targeted at a broader audience.
At the moment there is no automated test yet in openQA.
The use case is: "Let's try Debian and see what it is". The
result: "It's awesome!" To achieve this result, we need to have a
good set of pre-installed applications.
Now, pure blends come in. I think the goal of the pure blends is
exactly what we need for Desktop / Office / Junior / Med / ...
The 'experts' (blends team) knows which packages are required /
helpful / working.
Agreed.
One idea would be to provide packages like
debian-{desktop,office,med,junior}-live-system
Those packages will include a well defined structure to build the
live-system images via live-build.
You can use a 'Tasks' meta package for that.
Personally, I think it would be much better to provide "soon" the
possible to access to the pure blends, instead to "wait" a long
time until we are able to find a nice solution for a hierarchical
selection. Sure, if somebody is able to provide a solution, it's
fine.
You can file an ITP for the 'task-debian-junior' metapackage.
We should also work on a README.html / pdf file as a first
"Welcome" and guide new users where they can get more help. Links
to pre-installed documentation, Debian Wiki pages, Debian Local
Groups.
I have created a small example of a Debian Desktop live system.
https://salsa.debian.org/StefanKropp/debian-desktop-live-system/
The 'Welcome to Debian' is a separate topic. I'll respond later.
With kind rega
Live System images and Pure Blends
Hello Debian Project and CD-Team,
I have been started to look into live system generation
(live-build), Be honest, I have never been used a Debian Live CD.
Few days/weeks back I looked into the live CD which are provided
by Debian (live-wrapper).
I also think, it is very important to provide live-systems also
for the next releases.
I have been looked into:
* debian-live-11.4.0-amd64-standard.iso (1,1G / 800 packages)
* debian-live-11.4.0-amd64-xfce.iso (2,5G / 2270 packages)
* debian-live-11.4.0-amd64-gnome.iso (2,7G / 2572 packages)
I'm wondering if we should refine those images. Maybe the Debian
Project and the users can benefit from it.
One of the live images is called "standard". What does standard
means? What can the user do with the "standard" image? I looked
into xfce and gnome. The gnome image also includes few games,
evolution and thunderbird. xfce doesn't have a mailclient at all.
I think one person at the BoF said, it's not necessary to build a
image for every desktop manager. Personally, I agree.
I asked myself:
* Who will use the live system?
* Why will somebody use the live system?
* When should we provide a Debian Pure Blend?
Who will use the live system? Everybody!
Why will somebody use the live system? Everything!
It may helpful we the project defines some images with a scope.
Maybe something like this,..
# Rescue Disk Image
An image for a live system to rescues a broken system. It may
have a set of useful tool, but may not have a X-Server. Powerful
editor, maybe also gnu compilers and manpages and screen / tmux.
This is not just a 'small' Rescue Disk Image this will be a real
powerful Debian system (without X).
# Calamares-Installer
Live System to provide the Calamares-Installer. The live system
can be used to install Debian with Calamares.
(I haven't used it - I can not give much feedback, yet)
# Debian Desktop / Office
Debian Desktop / Office Live System could be used to try Debian
on a personal PC at home or as system at office. Also Debian
Junior could be a live system for kids.
We need to provide a set of applications the users may need. E.g.
like a E-Mail client, office suite, browser, Jabber Client,...
The use case is: "Let's try Debian and see what it is". The
result: "It's awesome!" To achieve this result, we need to have a
good set of pre-installed applications.
Now, pure blends come in. I think the goal of the pure blends is
exactly what we need for Desktop / Office / Junior / Med / ...
The 'experts' (blends team) knows which packages are required /
helpful / working.
One idea would be to provide packages like
debian-{desktop,office,med,junior}-live-system
Those packages will include a well defined structure to build the
live-system images via live-build.
Let's say we are using the pure blends framework to provide
meta-packages for those live-systems. We may define a
meta-package like:
{desktop,office,med,junior}-base-system
Those meta-package will include all important packages for the
pure blend project. If the user will install this package or the
live-system will use this package, we will have a good set of
packages for the project (blend system).
I think it would be also nice to use it for the Debian Installer
see #851555. I'm not sure if a "hierarchical" tasksel is
mandatory for the first step. Divide et impera. I think it would
be nice to have something like below - where we can reuse the
-base-system meta-packages:
Pure Blends
[ ] Debian Desktop - desktop-base-system
[ ] Debian Office - office-base-system
[ ] Debian Junior - junior-base-system
[ ] Debian Med - med-base-system
We may install for those blends quite the same as we would use in
the live CD. The user is able to install more blend packages, if
necessary. We will not confuse the users. If the users tries a
live-system and later will install the pure blend, they will get
the same environment.
On the other side, Debian Project knows every well what has
been offered to the user and knows the live-system and the
debian-installer will use the same packages.
Personally, I think it would be much better to provide "soon" the
possible to access to the pure blends, instead to "wait" a long
time until we are able to find a nice solution for a hierarchical
selection. Sure, if somebody is able to provide a solution, it's
fine.
We should also work on a README.html / pdf file as a first
"Welcome" and guide new users where they can get more help. Links
to pre-installed documentation, Debian Wiki pages, Debian Local
Groups.
I have created a small example of a Debian Desktop live system.
https://salsa.debian.org/StefanKropp/debian-desktop-live-system/
The packages are split in different files:
https://salsa.debian.org/StefanKropp/debian-desktop-live-system/-/tree/main/config/package-lists
Those files can be used to define the meta-packages.
Very important is to provide a "Welcome" file on users desktop:
https://salsa.debian.org/StefanKropp/debian-desktop-liv
