[Fedora-livecd-list] Git/Rawhide vs. v009/F7 ?

[Jeremy Katz]

On Sat, 2007-10-06 at 16:24 -0600, Tim Wood wrote:
> Two different recommendations have been posted on what version of  
> Fedora to use (F7 presumably with livecd-tools 009 vs. rawhide and  
> livecd-tools from git).  Rawhide and git (seems to me) to be a  
> formula for a very unstable development environment.  But, livecd- 
> tools 009 and F7 seem to be pretty out of date.  BUT... that's my  
> guessing. Why one combination versus the other from someone in the  
> livecd development loop?

rawhide and git can introduce a few bobbles from time to time, but as
much as possible, I try to not push things to the git master until I've
at least done a test run that worked with them.  Every once in a while,
I'll goof or not test an "obvious" change, but that's not that common.  

Running rawhide and/or building live images against rawhide will also
from time to time introduce "interesting" behaviors, but it's all part
of dogfooding.  Generally, these aren't too bad and they're pretty quick
to understand and get fixed.  

The contents of livecd-tools-009 are definitely quite a bit different
from what is present today, so if you're actually looking at working on
the tools themselves, you're going to be far better off to use the tip,
even if you do it on Fedora 7[1].  If you're just building images, well,
009 is probably fine unless there's a specific feature you care about
that wasn't implemented until after then.  

Hopefully development on the tools will be cooling down a bit post
Fedora 8.  I know there are some things that we want to implement for
images _created_ (like persistence), but hopefully actually
livecd-creator changes will be slowing a bit.

> And how do you modify grub arguments for a livecd (besides doing  
> weird foo on a created image...)?

bootloader --append="some args here"   should do the trick

Jeremy

[1] Again, with the caveat that this is likely to break a little more
often just because I don't try it very often.  Things that break should
be relatively obvious, though, and patches always accepted.  Or I'll
even look at tracebacks and usually can fix them up pretty quick