[Fedora-livecd-list] usefulness of non-zisofs, 'dual booting' scenarios

[Jane Dogalt]

--- Jeremy Katz <katzj at redhat.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 2006-04-10 at 22:27 -0700, Jane Dogalt wrote:
> > The motivation I see for wanting to add regular old iso as an option (not
> even
> > zisofs) is for the user to see files in the iso.  And rather, the user (of
> > kadischi)'s users.
> 
> As it turns out, you could do this even if the main live CD parts are a
> loopback mount.  They're not mutually exclusive at all

Yes, that's right.

Honestly I'm not trying to stoke a flamewar here.  Maybe for development
simplicity it does make sense to just focus on one filesystem type right now,
and save features like multiple different filesystem type images being overlaid
in the final system with a unionfs to people unafraid of loopback madness like
myself (for the timebeing) ;).

-----------

Elsewhere, replying to the isofs shared win/lin files example of chitlesh's
marketing videos, jhartline wrote-

> This is a likely scenario with an Official forged Fedora Core LiveCD or DVD.
> Not a Kadischi CD in my opinion.
> The bootsplash stuff is there to distinguish where and from how the disc 
> came about.
> Promotional materials and other specific things like that should be 
> distributed with
> an official disc, not these user-made CDs.

Absolutely, of course chitleshes promotional materials would be used on an
official fedora livecd.  My point was to illustrate the _type_ of scenario that
many end-users of a fedora-livecd generating system would find themselves in
(when they are off happily producing their unofficial fedora livecd's).

-jdog





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com