About due for a new ISO?

GI Jack · 2011-07-29 00:03:17

Agreed. Though I'll forewarn folks that aufs2 on 2.6.39 has not been stable in my experience. That said, we can't afford to wait for overlayfs which will be appearing in linux 3.1.

I tried kernel26-pf with 2.6.39 and it was about as stable as a hand grenade. That said, some sort of unionfs + kernel is a must. I went through this drama with my own live cd project.

larch live cd maker went with 2.6.38 until a suitable replacement can be found. It should work until 3.1 is available.
ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/larch/larch8/i686/

Inxsible · 2011-07-29 01:04:20

G I Jack wrote:

I tried kernel26-pf with 2.6.39 and it was about as stable as a hand grenade.

Hand-grenades are very stable. They can remain in "factory-condition" for many many years. That's why armies normally stockpile on them.

If you were to remove the pin however ......

ksira · 2011-07-30 21:25:34

I agree with the sentiment of a new Arch ISO for Linux 3.0. Arch seems to be getting lots of good press lately and having Linux 3.0 on a ISO would undoubtedly help more, even if Linux 3.0 is just release all about a number change. The timing of an ISO release is almost arbitrary anyway, why not make it coincide with an arbitrary version upgrade of the kernel?

karol · 2011-07-30 21:34:22

ksira wrote:

I agree with the sentiment of a new Arch ISO for Linux 3.0. Arch seems to be getting lots of good press lately and having Linux 3.0 on a ISO would undoubtedly help more, even if Linux 3.0 is just release all about a number change. The timing of an ISO release is almost arbitrary anyway, why not make it coincide with an arbitrary version upgrade of the kernel?

What about e.g. aufs2? Does it work w/ linux 3.0?

Gusar · 2011-07-30 21:58:41

karol wrote:

What about e.g. aufs2? Does it work w/ linux 3.0?

Yes. I haven't done extensive testing so I can't really comment on stability, but on a quick glance it worked.

scenox · 2011-08-13 12:49:25

furthermore, the grub default menu on the 2010 iso points to the old vmlinuz26. there are many people out there which don't know why this file is missing and why they can't boot (it seems that there is no symlink created). not everybody reads the latest news.

anyway i heard the new iso is on the way

Last edited by scenox (2011-08-13 12:50:14)

quantumphaze · 2011-08-13 13:09:34

The situation is getting fairly desperate that I would recommend that new users get the testing isos instead of the old 2010.05 one. I'll test out the 2011.08.12 64-bit iso tomorrow with GRUB2 and LVM (two things I have to set up manually outside of the archsetup thing).

Pierre · 2011-08-13 13:14:56

08.12 and 0.8.13 are broken btw; so you probably want to try a more recent one.

quantumphaze · 2011-08-13 13:22:16

8.13 (today) is the latest up at http://releng.archlinux.org/isos/

Will there be an 8.14 out tomorrow? No point if these are broken as you say.

archman-cro · 2011-08-13 13:52:11

Pierre wrote:

08.12 and 0.8.13 are broken btw; so you probably want to try a more recent one.

https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php … 78#p974878

Broken or not, at the end?
According to the bug report, it should be fixed in 2011.08.11...

Pierre · 2011-08-13 14:46:25

I was talking about this bug: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/25546

scjet · 2011-08-13 14:56:05

wankel wrote:

CPUnltd wrote:
First and foremost, I get that we are a rolling release... I take no issue with that... but for those who install via the ISOs provided, there are now a lot of extras to the process (that aren't documented on the wiki or anything like that... granted they shouldn't be with the release of a new ISO to cover the extra steps) that can be a pain in the long run.
I'm sure it's already in the mix and probably soon to be released, but I just wanna stir the pot a little to find out if it is or am I just stuck with updating 3 times before I get to install any actual software (sarcastic, but not meant to be rude)...
new iso is currently in testing and should be out in another month or two.

Ya, it's been over 4 months since," out in another month or two" ago, but since we're already at Kernel 3.* in the core,
a "Current Release: 2011.09" should atleast be in order now, soon ?
work and time constraints obviously premitting, sry plz don't take this the wrong way.
But, If you don't ask ?, then you don't know.

dodgefan · 2011-08-20 02:54:47

looks like a new one is out!!!

http://www.archlinux.org/download/

anonymous_user · 2011-08-20 02:59:55

Is it for real? A final release and not a testing one?

karol · 2011-08-20 03:04:44

anonymous_user wrote:

Is it for real? A final release and not a testing one?

Yes.
http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/ … 21392.html
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/De … 2011.08.19

Those who are going to use the iso: please also update the wiki (Beginners' Guide etc.) if necessary to reflect the current state.

Last edited by karol (2011-08-20 03:06:09)

CPUnltd · 2011-08-20 04:58:37

Looks like my prayers have finally been answered... Will be downloading all versions of this right now...

enihcam · 2011-08-20 13:00:43

karol wrote:

anonymous_user wrote:
Is it for real? A final release and not a testing one?
Yes.
http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/ … 21392.html
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/De … 2011.08.19
Those who are going to use the iso: please also update the wiki (Beginners' Guide etc.) if necessary to reflect the current state.

*systemd* is not included as default..........

dodgefan · 2011-08-20 14:16:30

have a fresh Arch install using that ISO, no issues to report

one thing i did notice though was during the package selection, the list started with packages that were listed in None and they were all unselected. so i started selecting them and then got down to the Base section and the same packages were listed and pre-selected. so i had to unselect the ones in None

any reason why those are there in the first place?

karol · 2011-08-20 14:20:09

dodgefan wrote:

have a fresh Arch install using that ISO, no issues to report
one thing i did notice though was during the package selection, the list started with packages that were listed in None and they were all unselected. so i started selecting them and then got down to the Base section and the same packages were listed and pre-selected. so i had to unselect the ones in None
any reason why those are there in the first place?

Seems like https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/25569
Are you sure you got it on 2011.08.19 iso? If so, please reopen that bug report.

dodgefan · 2011-08-20 16:59:08

yep, but now that i look i do have a lot of arch testing iso files in the folder i use to burn cd's so i might have grabbed the wrong one. how can i tell which iso i used once i have it burned to disc

and just in case i went ahead and asked to have that bug reopened since im pretty sure i used 2011.08.19

karol · 2011-08-20 17:08:56

dodgefan wrote:

i might have grabbed the wrong one. how can i tell which iso i used once i have it burned to disc

Check the checksum

md5sum /dev/sr0

and compare
http://www.archlinux.org/iso/2011.08.19/md5sums.txt

IIRC this unfortunately may not always work, depending how exactly did you burn the image.
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=111481

Last edited by karol (2011-08-20 17:15:45)

Durden · 2011-08-20 17:14:26

New official ISO out today

karol · 2011-08-20 17:15:19

Durden wrote:

New official ISO out today

We know :-)
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php … 33#p978933

ataraxia · 2011-08-20 19:16:36

dodgefan wrote:

how can i tell which iso i used once i have it burned to disc

blkid /dev/sr0

should tell you the actual name of the image. You might have to run it as root if you're not in the "optical" group.

dodgefan · 2011-08-20 19:24:10

karol wrote:

dodgefan wrote:
i might have grabbed the wrong one. how can i tell which iso i used once i have it burned to disc
Check the checksum
md5sum /dev/sr0
and compare
http://www.archlinux.org/iso/2011.08.19/md5sums.txt
IIRC this unfortunately may not always work, depending how exactly did you burn the image.
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=111481

didnt work

Arch Linux

#51 2011-07-29 00:03:17

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#52 2011-07-29 01:04:20

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#53 2011-07-30 21:25:34

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#54 2011-07-30 21:34:22

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#55 2011-07-30 21:58:41

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#56 2011-08-13 12:49:25

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#57 2011-08-13 13:09:34

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#58 2011-08-13 13:14:56

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#59 2011-08-13 13:22:16

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#60 2011-08-13 13:52:11

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#61 2011-08-13 14:46:25

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#62 2011-08-13 14:56:05

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#63 2011-08-20 02:54:47

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#64 2011-08-20 02:59:55

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#65 2011-08-20 03:04:44

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#66 2011-08-20 04:58:37

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#67 2011-08-20 13:00:43

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#68 2011-08-20 14:16:30

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#69 2011-08-20 14:20:09

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#70 2011-08-20 16:59:08

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#71 2011-08-20 17:08:56

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#72 2011-08-20 17:14:26

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#73 2011-08-20 17:15:19

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#74 2011-08-20 19:16:36

Re: About due for a new ISO?

#75 2011-08-20 19:24:10

Re: About due for a new ISO?

Board footer