What next? [Was: Re: LiveCD or No LiveCD?]

J. Greenlees lists at jaqui-greenlees.net
Tue Feb 26 08:30:44 PST 2008

Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> I could let this thread continue for some more time, but I get the 
> impression that the ratio of votes will continue approximately the same.

as with the last time this subject came up :)
seems that while majority like the livecd project, getting more support
isn't easy.

> So the real question now becomes, where do we go from here? There have 
> been a few suggestions put forward as to what may help future 
> development and what will alleviate the original concerns brought up. I 
> will try to lay down what I recall:
> * Go back to the drawing board, so to speak. Start a new CD from scratch 
> that is minimal (and minimal means minimal, not just 'without X') and 
> re-define core concepts that the CD will adhere closely to. (For 
> example, as proof of the soundness of LFS, the CD should strictly adhere 
> to LFS. If we adopt this one aspect, we should also be able to make use 
> of ALFS development to produce the CD, instead of maintaining a full set 
> of separate scripts.)

minimal software, maximum hardware supported?
Even the no-source cd is viable, if the nic on the system is supported.
Not every system has physical interface to add driver sources to the hd
when running the livecd, laptops frequently have no floppy drive and
damaged usb ports. My own old Dell insiron has both a floppy and cd, but
if running the livecd there is no access to floppy, since they use the
same bay in he box, the one usb port is damaged from usb devices being
knocked around while plugged in, so the 4 thumb drives are not readily
functional. From talking with the guys at Vancouver Laptop, that latter
is an extremely common problem.


> * Add an LFS-style document to the project that teaches how to create a 
> LiveCD from scratch.

That sounds like a very useful addition to the whole LFS project set,
expanding the "remasterme" from the livecd into a full blown book on
building a livecd. I'm guessing one that is a minimal lfs system, so
that additional functionality would be more in keeping with the overall
design of lfs-blfs.

> * Devise methods for users to more easily provide feedback and make it 
> easier to contribute as a whole.

increasing participation levels is probably the hardest thing to do.
most people online currently seem to be focussed on the social
networking type activities, implementing any of which would require
redesigning the website to draw people into activity there, rather than
the email lists.

> What are your thoughts on the above? And are there any other 
> suggestions, either new ones or ones that I missed?

My only comments in addition, I'm going to be fairly busy for the next
while, I'm in the midst of starting up my own web hosting business.


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list