James Heather j.heather at surrey.ac.uk
Fri Jun 11 08:35:11 UTC 2010 wrote:
I haven't followed the thread of (1), but it's a separate
issue as to
whether syslinux is worth the extra space, even if it's small. In any
case, custom builds are always free to include or not include syslinux.
This show your complete lack of understanding first of all to the
situation which you decided to comment
was becoming whatever and something else which I don't care about.
Some attempt to sound
professional in an English-major sort of way.
First of all, syslinux is an absolute requirement, if you try to build
a LiveCD without syslinux
in the source repository it will fail, guaranteed. Please do not
comment on this issue which you know nothing about.
I have seen other posts of yours where you state syslinux might be in
the initrd.. which it is not.
syslinux hold the ISOLINUX bootloader, which makes the freaking LiveCD boot.
If you don't like what's on the base DVD, build your
whole point of this list.
What I don't like is the requirement on syslinux, because it also
requires any time I build a liveCD
which could be 50MB or 50 million megabytes, I would need a networked
repository or local mirror of an Everything tree.
It is much simpler to be able to do testing of any given medium or
smaller size package set on livecd-creator
using the base DVD ISO, not an Everything tree, especially not one
that is on a remote server, as most of
the repositories are. By this you and Bruno now are both suggesting
one who wants to use livecd-creator
must have either network or a syned mirror locally, which is a bunch
of chicken scratch, keep it to yourself.
Have fun and hopefully you can let this clown code patch parade
actually do something useful with LiveCD tools before it becomes in a
state of limbo between useless features
and broken clown patches where the whole thing need to be rewritten.
This is not how you develop software.