Rolling Release install.iso

Pick2 · 2008-03-25 16:44:47

Arch is a rolling release distro , Lets discuss having a rolling install.iso also !
As a starting point for this discussion , let's say you have one dev
( Tpowa , you are volunteered for this discussion )

1) Tpowa takes a snapshot of Arch at Sunday midnight.
2) Throughout the week , He checks and fixes any reported problems , first in installations , then in upgrades as his time permits.
3) at the end of the week , regardless of haw many bugs you have or have not fixed , you create a new install.iso just before sunday midnight and post it to the mirror.
4) update your snapshot to current and repeat the process.

The benefits would be a more up to date install.iso , with less packages to pull from the mirrors , and less disparity between a rolling system and a fresh install.

you may well have a few problems in each install.iso , but you have that now.
on the other hand , there is no way to predict how long an install.iso will work before the rolling release system totally borks your last install.iso ( after you install and packman update it ) , it could well be a matter of days !
So having a rolling install.iso may well give you less bugs than an .iso done every few months.

What do you think ?

xdeusx · 2008-03-25 16:57:52

I think this isn't necessary.

The FTP-Install-CD downloads the up to date packages...
So there you go, one cd as up to date as the mirror you choose.

Last edited by xdeusx (2008-03-25 16:58:47)

Pick2 · 2008-03-25 17:23:54

I tried 6 different versions starting with 0.7 , 2 were FTP , and not one has ever worked. It would either not boot at all or screw up after the initial packman update. I've had no trouble with debian , nor any other distro I've tried ( after a couple hours with google and search , just like i tried with the Arch attempts ).
I'm glad it worked for you , the question is how many has it not worked for ?

kensai · 2008-03-25 17:49:20

xdeusx wrote:

I think this isn't necessary.
The FTP-Install-CD downloads the up to date packages...
So there you go, one cd as up to date as the mirror you choose.

Well, I think that what the original poster want, might be to much work.

But as to having an ftp install from any other or in this case the latest iso at the moment which is don't panic, would bring you a broken system, there has been too many changes in between. The first problem that comes to mind is messed up permissions in /tmp and /var.

iBertus · 2008-03-25 18:13:42

I've used Arch since 0.6 was released. On 4 different machines I've never had an install problem. I've used both FTP and base install discs.

Dusty · 2008-03-25 18:54:17

I think its a good idea to have a rolling install iso for several reasons:

1) when it comes time to make an iso release, development behaves differently. The devs use the testing repository for release packages that aren't ready yet and we have large pushes from testing to core as the iso is released. This kind of testing is necessary because they need to get the iso right. The downside is that it adds a "non-rolling" element to the release. Its kind of like filing a flat on one edge of a circle. As it rolls it pauses at that flat for a bit before it gains momentum.

2) Having lots of recent isos means if the most recent one is broken for whatever reason, you're probably able to use an earlier iso. The community would likely monitor "stable" isos and when users have problems, people would say "use the yyyy-mm-dd iso instead and then pacman -Syu".

3) It would negate the need for testing isos. This combines 1 and 2, really. If an iso is broken this week, its broken. Use last week's iso instead.

4) It would allow isos to be built automatically using scripts. It wouldn't matter if they were broken.

5) We could still have "major" releases that coincide with one or more of:
- pacman releases
- installer releases
- kernel releases
- gcc releases

6) Its SIMPLE, from a development standpoint. There's no bikeshed discussion about whether we're ready for a release. It just happens, ready or not.

So then, who's going to be brave enough to submit a feature request to the bugtracker before cactus, phrakture, cerebral, neotuli, or tomk breathes fire for not doing so?

And who's going to be ambitious enough to create a tool to automate iso releases when any of the above suggests 'patches welcome'?

;-)
Dusty

ibendiben · 2008-03-25 20:21:41

Dusty wrote:

I think its a good idea to have a rolling install iso for several reasons:
2) Having lots of recent isos means if the most recent one is broken for whatever reason, you're probably able to use an earlier iso. The community would likely monitor "stable" isos and when users have problems, people would say "use the yyyy-mm-dd iso instead and then pacman -Syu".

I like this idea too! From my point of view there is little to say against it.

Kknd · 2008-03-25 22:55:14

A FTP install is very simple and should get a up to date system. But, I had several problems with my last FTP install (had to install the downloaded packages by hand).

But if someone can make a weekly release, thats good too!

eerok · 2008-03-26 00:42:53

For those having install problems because they can't boot the iso, there's always this option:

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Ins … her_distro

This is actually my favorite way to install -- it's fun to start with just pacman and build the whole system from there

cr7 · 2008-03-28 18:22:01

4) It would allow isos to be built automatically using scripts. It wouldn't matter if they were broken.

+1

godane · 2008-03-29 01:58:30

Pick2 wrote:

Arch is a rolling release distro , Lets discuss having a rolling install.iso also !
As a starting point for this discussion , let's say you have one dev
( Tpowa , you are volunteered for this discussion )

1) Tpowa takes a snapshot of Arch at Sunday midnight.
2) Throughout the week , He checks and fixes any reported problems , first in installations , then in upgrades as his time permits.
3) at the end of the week , regardless of haw many bugs you have or have not fixed , you create a new install.iso just before sunday midnight and post it to the mirror.
4) update your snapshot to current and repeat the process.

The benefits would be a more up to date install.iso , with less packages to pull from the mirrors , and less disparity between a rolling system and a fresh install.
you may well have a few problems in each install.iso , but you have that now.
on the other hand , there is no way to predict how long an install.iso will work before the rolling release system totally borks your last install.iso ( after you install and packman update it ) , it could well be a matter of days !
So having a rolling install.iso may well give you less bugs than an .iso done every few months.
What do you think ?

I have been making a live CD like this for the last two months. Releasing every 7 to 10 days a update iso.

My live cd is not installable yet but it will be soon. Its just going to be the live CD running from the hard drive which is called a frugal install. I use a different kernel so i think it should be just programs the can be bug reported.

Arch-live is the name of the distro by the way. Its a modular live cd like slax but based on archlinux with modified linux-live scripts for more boot options for bypassing problems that slax would normal have.

Go to my website on left side to check it out.

I hope this helps everyone.

PS I think its a great idea to have a rolling iso release. But i think a bi-monthly releases would make it easier on the iso maker.

Arch Linux

#1 2008-03-25 16:44:47

Rolling Release install.iso

#2 2008-03-25 16:57:52

Re: Rolling Release install.iso

#3 2008-03-25 17:23:54

Re: Rolling Release install.iso

#4 2008-03-25 17:49:20

Re: Rolling Release install.iso

#5 2008-03-25 18:13:42

Re: Rolling Release install.iso

#6 2008-03-25 18:54:17

Re: Rolling Release install.iso

#7 2008-03-25 20:21:41

Re: Rolling Release install.iso

#8 2008-03-25 22:55:14

Re: Rolling Release install.iso

#9 2008-03-26 00:42:53

Re: Rolling Release install.iso

#10 2008-03-28 18:22:01

Re: Rolling Release install.iso

#11 2008-03-29 01:58:30

Re: Rolling Release install.iso

Board footer