[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Why can't the hard disk partition use the same logic as NFS and URL installs?



The "local disk" installation option is limited to using ISO images
for installation, while NFS and URL (http and ftp) installs will use
*either* ISOs or repository trees.

The question is why?

To me it appears that this is a very limiting situation, and that
the local partition should also be able to contain *either* form of
package sources.

Is is just that the local partition option is buried so deep in
the heart of history that it can't be changed easily?  I would think
that the developers would simply find a way to specify the source of
packages once and for all, and then let the rest of the install use a
uniform interface.  After all, the current method is to loop mount
ISOs and then access packages as if they were repos.

Again, why not use a local partition the same way.  Of course, it
would not be prudent to read and write to the sources partition at
the same time, but I suspect that the experienced users could live
with a restriction that the source not be on a partition that is going
to be the target of an install.

Allowing "local partition" installs to use either form would enable
something like using a USB storage unit to be the source for multiple
installs.

(I haven't the skills to actually modify the code, or else I would
submit patches.  I'm an administrator and tester, using the installer
a lot, no longer a developer or coder.)

-- 
G.Wolfe Woodbury

Attachment: pgpyJhHgTZz0M.pgp
Description: PGP signature


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]