[Fedora-livecd-list] [RFC/PATCH] livecd rebootless installer

[Jeroen van Meeuwen]

Douglas McClendon wrote:
> Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
>> Douglas McClendon wrote:
>>> Douglas McClendon wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Theoretical Workaround #1-5
>>>> -------------------------
>>
>> Just curious; I like what I'm reading, although I do not follow some
>> parts of the theoretical workarounds, but: Is there any particular use
>> case for all of this? I'm asking, because the only thing I can think
>> of, it's all this work being done to prevent a user's
>> "5-min-avg-uptime" desktop from having to reboot after install from a
>> live disc.
> 
> Short answer - dunno.  I think however "5-min-avg-uptime" doesn't quite
> describe it.

It wasn't the essence of the point I wanted to make anyway, but I sure
hope you get what I mean. User desktops usually do not require an uptime
as long as humanly/physically possible -although long uptimes are a
feature! it indicates the operating system's stability, including
applications that freeze up the system (in which most cases a user would
reset the system).

  The essence of why liveCDs are cool(==useful?) in the
> first place, is because they allow users to try out the complete system,
> without the traditionally complex and problematic process of installing
> and configuring a linux system.  I'm not sure if in 2001 I or Mr.
> Knopper could really have foreseen the plethora of use-cases for liveCDs
> as they are used today.

On the other hand, installing Linux isn't that difficult at all,
nowadays. I'm sure though this use case (if any) has not seen the day of
light in the old knoppix days ;-)

> 
> In a similar vein, I would say that, perhaps this feature, which I'm
> just working on out of pure spite for "unnecessary reboots" will spark
> someone else's imagination, and use-cases will become more evident in
> the future.  Don't even get me started about seeing setroubleshoot
> suggesting that I reboot my system to fix a problem...
> 

I'm sure there's /a/ use-case for this technical advancement. Besides
that, I'm all for any technical advancement -whether it has actual
use-cases or not.

> Also, as to actual use-cases, clearly persistance-to-USB flash as
> already described in the livecd-tools wish-list is _vastly_ more useful
> than all this hackery.  But as it turns out, implementing that involves
> mechanisms of the same nature as these hacks.  I'll segway that to...
> 

I"m not sure I understand this one. One of the features of livecd-tools
I presume is to just -persistently- commit changes to the USB devices'
filesytem. If also committing the running system to the actual hardware
is one of it's goals too, it should be a different goal altogether.

Either way, +1 to the overall idea.

Kind regards,

Jeroen van Meeuwen
-kanarip