2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

cr7 · 2009-01-16 15:15:57

ammon wrote:

Kernel 2.6.28 is released on Christmas, and ext4 also. So there is nothing made in 2009 in this kernel, or iso.
It should be named 2008.12

That doesn't mean anything. The iso brings the name of the year and month in which is released.

ammon · 2009-01-16 19:04:15

All the same, name is not important. When should I expect this new iso?
New kernel passed testing as i can see...
I cant wait to try it with ext4.

Dieter@be · 2009-01-17 11:49:54

ammon wrote:

Kernel 2.6.28 is released on Christmas, and ext4 also. So there is nothing made in 2009 in this kernel, or iso.
It should be named 2008.12

Release names are based on time of release, not on time of the included packages' upstream release dates.

b9anders · 2009-01-17 13:36:07

does anyone know when an installer with ext4 support will be available?

jelly · 2009-01-17 14:05:46

FLCLFan wrote:

2008.12 is gone and past. I suggest we make it look better and update it for 2009.01 with kernel 2.6.28

Why should the installation iso look better? I like the simple style, it's logical and we don't need i nice gui thing like the ubuntu installer:P. I am also waiting for the new ISO so i can convert my ext3 partitions on my lapyop and reinstall my desktop:)

Dieter@be · 2009-01-17 15:30:08

b9anders wrote:

does anyone know when an installer with ext4 support will be available?

The installers are available already. (Both arch-installer and aif support it) See http://projects.archlinux.org/
For the iso's you'll need to wait a few more days.

FLCLFan · 2009-01-17 19:41:12

jelly wrote:

FLCLFan wrote:
2008.12 is gone and past. I suggest we make it look better and update it for 2009.01 with kernel 2.6.28
Why should the installation iso look better? I like the simple style, it's logical and we don't need i nice gui thing like the ubuntu installer:P. I am also waiting for the new ISO so i can convert my ext3 partitions on my lapyop and reinstall my desktop:)

You misunderstand me. I'm saying making it look better by updating the date to 2009. I have no problems with the style of the installer.

rocktorrentz · 2009-01-23 23:35:00

Anyone actually working on a new iso or are there just plans? This is in no way a nag and I mean no disrespect to all you awesome developers. However I want to wipe my pc on monday and I would very much like to use ext4 across the board.

edit: It would appear that I forgot to read the news...sorry. I'm on the mailing list. If all else fails I'll use the available alpha isos.
/me scurries away and adds the news to his rss reader...

Last edited by rocktorrentz (2009-01-23 23:40:06)

Meikj · 2009-01-23 23:42:20

rocktorrentz wrote:

Anyone actually working on a new iso or are there just plans? This is in no way a nag and I mean no disrespect to all you awesome developers. However I want to wipe my pc on monday and I would very much like to use ext4 across the board.

Yes, the new ISO release is coming very soon. In fact, I'm sure it will be released over the weekend. This is the same reason why I am waiting for the new release, I just want to make absolutely sure everything will be compatible and fresh.

There is some information on the mailing list about the new release.

Anonymo · 2009-01-24 00:45:54

Reading through the mailing lists for 2009.01 (I don't know how to post yet), I see that we are going to have 2 cds, a x86-32 and a x86-64. The isos seem small enough that it seems they could both fit on 1 cd, just like one of the previous cds we had.

Last edited by Anonymo (2009-01-24 05:27:24)

ibendiben · 2009-01-24 00:48:45

That's a good thing imo. The smaller the better! Takes less time to download and burn...

agapito · 2009-01-24 00:56:49

I prefer 32 and 64 bits at the same cd.

whargoul · 2009-01-24 01:36:20

agapito wrote:

I prefer 32 and 64 bits at the same cd.

Why?

Ranguvar · 2009-01-24 02:25:11

Why not a single CD with all 32-bit applications (obviously the Core CD would have to include both 32 and 64-bit _packages_, but I mean actual stuff on the CD), and a 32-bit and a 64-bit kernel, which can be chosen between on start, the only benefit of a 64-bit kernel meaning you can chroot into 64-bit systems? That's what SystemRescueCd does.

jelly · 2009-01-24 09:56:18

Anonymo wrote:

Reading through the mailing lists for 2009.01 (I don't know how to post yet), I see that we are going to have 2 cds, a x86-32 and a x86-64. The isos seem small enough that it seems they could both fit on 1 cd, just like one of the previous cds we had.

I personally like small iso's fast download, fast install, and you can use your old usb stick to boot the iso

w00t i hope it's get's released this weekend, then i finally can make a complete migrate to ext4.

Last edited by jelly (2009-01-24 09:57:05)

agapito · 2009-01-24 10:09:22

whargoul wrote:

agapito wrote:
I prefer 32 and 64 bits at the same cd.
Why?

Because i have installed Arch 32 bits and Arch 64 bits. I want reinstall with ext4 and i don't want burn 2 isos.

jelly · 2009-01-24 12:10:51

wrong info

Last edited by jelly (2009-01-24 12:55:24)

u_no_hu · 2009-01-24 12:23:30

Allan wrote:

Those are for internal testing and probably should not be used outside a testing environment. You will also hammer our bandwidth which is not a good thing...
Please wait a couple of days for fixed versions to be on your mirrors.

jelly · 2009-01-24 12:55:10

u_no_hu wrote:

Allan wrote:
Those are for internal testing and probably should not be used outside a testing environment. You will also hammer our bandwidth which is not a good thing...
Please wait a couple of days for fixed versions to be on your mirrors.

m 'ok how bad could i be, to install those for a desktop? And sorry i just used a part of the download. I think i am just too impatient:| , also i removed the link so it won't be abused anymore

Last edited by jelly (2009-01-24 12:57:06)

mechmg93 · 2009-01-24 12:57:05

jelly, have a look at the bugtracker. as i see these isos have some troubles till now.

i am also very impatient for a clean install with ext4/kdemod 4.2 replacing my debian unstable, but i think that i can wait some days more :-)

jelly · 2009-01-25 11:19:43

well i haven't find any bugs so far, i will do some testing in a virtual machine

nowahn · 2009-01-25 13:13:34

rocktorrentz wrote:

I want to wipe my pc on monday and I would very much like to use ext4 across the board

mechmg93 wrote:

i am also very impatient for a clean install with ext4/kdemod 4.2

you can do it now. see this thread

maxplank · 2009-01-31 18:04:50

"Nepal" .... nice to have my country's name associated with Arch , i am a Arch user and i love it , I have been a great fan of redhat and then fedora for a long time and now i greatly love Arch, yes "Keep is Simple" . Thanks guys once again.

Don-DiZzLe · 2009-02-01 15:11:16

So what's the status on this ISO, will there be a new version anytime soon?

Dieter@be · 2009-02-01 15:14:54

Don-DiZzLe wrote:

So what's the status on this ISO, will there be a new version anytime soon?

Yes

Arch Linux

#101 2009-01-16 15:15:57

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#102 2009-01-16 19:04:15

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#103 2009-01-17 11:49:54

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#104 2009-01-17 13:36:07

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#105 2009-01-17 14:05:46

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#106 2009-01-17 15:30:08

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#107 2009-01-17 19:41:12

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#108 2009-01-23 23:35:00

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#109 2009-01-23 23:42:20

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#110 2009-01-24 00:45:54

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#111 2009-01-24 00:48:45

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#112 2009-01-24 00:56:49

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#113 2009-01-24 01:36:20

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#114 2009-01-24 02:25:11

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#115 2009-01-24 09:56:18

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#116 2009-01-24 10:09:22

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#117 2009-01-24 12:10:51

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#118 2009-01-24 12:23:30

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#119 2009-01-24 12:55:10

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#120 2009-01-24 12:57:05

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#121 2009-01-25 11:19:43

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#122 2009-01-25 13:13:34

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#123 2009-01-31 18:04:50

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#124 2009-02-01 15:11:16

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

#125 2009-02-01 15:14:54

Re: 2008.12 archboot test iso/img files

Board footer