boot.iso vs netinst.iso vs efiboot.img

moshe nahmias moshegrey at
Sat Jan 26 21:09:50 UTC 2013

I'm new here and just sent the introduction mail so I hope I don't do
something horribly wrong here...

I see that some of the debate here is that the documentation is not full
enough (uefi stuff), if I am right on this then I think the best way to
handle it will be to include the relevant paragraphs from the man page on
the wiki...

I am willing to do this but since I don't really know what exactly you are
talking about I need some guidance...

I would like to see where can I see the rest of this debate and others if

If I did something wrong here I apologize


On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Chris Murphy <lists at>wrote:

> On Jan 26, 2013, at 12:06 PM, John Reiser <jreiser at> wrote:
> > It's a matter of cost, which varies.  My out-of-pocket expense
> > of burning "4x" DVD+RW (@ $0.24) has been about the same as using USB
> stick (@ $12.)
> > I've had USB sticks wear out (bit errors, and not from too many writes)
> > after some years, just as I have had DVD+RW fail after fewer than 100
> rewrites.
> > Sometimes wall-clock latency matters a lot to me; then top-quality "16x"
> > (@ $0.25) is best.
> Besides USB being on all computers that run Fedora, and computers with
> optical drives shrinking; even 16x DVD is slower than molasses on a
> Minnesota Tuesday in the dead of winter. If time is money, and the choice
> is a matter of cost, then DVD is expensive.
> > I have no problems producing USB sticks that are UEFI bootable [and they
> do work],
> > because I read the documentation, which includes "man
> livecd-iso-to-disk",
> > where the "--efi" parameter is explained.
> I'm not talking about you, or me. The context from the outset was the
> Installation Guide, and regular users.
> The Installation Guide does not mention man livecd-iso-to-disk, or any of
> its switches. And it would be *inappropriate*, to say the least, if the
> Installation Guide did refer the user to a man page.
> > I do get persistent user data when I use the appropriate incantation.
> Incantation is not in the Installation Guide.
> > I get a re-format when I ask for it via --format.
> That incantation is not in the Installation Guide.
> >
> >>> The only hassles are when I switch between i386 and x86_64, or between
> >>> UEFI and non-UEFI systems, both of which work better for me with a
> re-format.
> >
> > <<snip>>
> >> So I'm still left wondering why dd is last.
> >
> > It's a wiki.  Put your $0.02 there, too.
> OK thanks for scraping the bottom of the barrel.
> boot.iso vs Fedora-18-x86_64-netinst.iso, presumably you prefer
> Fedora-18-x86_64-netinst.iso?
> efiboot.img doesn't actually create bootable media, so presumably you
> prefer Fedora-18-x86_64-netinst.iso for that too?
> And "Not available" for both UEFI install and minimal USB media,
> presumably you agree is incorrect, and should have Fedora-18-x86_64-DVD.iso
> and Fedora-18-x86_64-netinst.iso respectively.
> Chris Murphy
> --
> test mailing list
> test at
> To unsubscribe:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the test mailing list