OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta - BSD

This is a discussion on OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta - BSD ; Over the holidays, I began thinking about producing simple LiveCDs with little other than the OS on them, and around the new year began building a few different variations, with a FAQ. "Why?" is Q1: To allow curious people the ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 45

Thread: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

  1. OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    Over the holidays, I began thinking about producing simple LiveCDs with
    little other than the OS on them, and around the new year began building a
    few different variations, with a FAQ.

    "Why?" is Q1:

    To allow curious people the opportunity to try out an OpenBSD environment
    without actually installing it, simply as a public service. A LiveCD like
    this allows a new user to make a test of the OS without having to ever
    touch a hard drive, find spare hardware, or build a virtual machine
    testbed.

    The OpenBSD Project does not appear to have any direct interest in this
    form of advocacy, though LiveCDs have been produced over time by members
    of the community at-large for a wide variety of reasons. Those made
    available to the public that I've seen have been special-purpose builds,
    and not the default, generic OpenBSD.

    The OpenBSD install process is quick and easy. But, for the new user,
    the process of doing the install can be intimidating -- and possibly
    risks reinstall of a previously installed OS on a multiboot machine --
    due to the need for some manual disk partitioning. On many popular
    architectures, OpenBSD uses both MBR partitions and BSD disklabels, and
    for someone who does not regularly deal with hard drives and their
    Cylinder, Head, and Sector addressing, this can add additional confusion.

    To measure interest, I began a discussion thread in the OpenBSD section of
    bsdforums.org, which is *extremely* newbie focused. Until today, I hadn't
    made any links public.

    Now, due to a FreeBSD user who wanted to switch but could not install due
    to missing drivers in bsd.rd, I decided to go ahead and make links to FAQ
    and download pages public.

    The poll associated with the bsdforums.org thread was interesting; 10%
    don't want a LiveCD made available at all ("we don't need no stinkin'
    Newbies!").

    I would think if I posted a similar poll on misc@, a much higher
    percentage would say they agree with that, to avoid polluting the mailing
    lists with questions from people who can neither RTFM nor RTFA, which is
    pretty much the case for many questions on bsdforums.org.

    Even so, there are still valuable reasons to make more than bsd.rd
    available for boot.

    I am posting here, primarily to reach a different audience. I am
    interested in feedback and suggestions from experienced OpenBSD users. So
    far, private beta testers have been noobs. I would post on advocacy@, but
    for some reason, my recent e-mails to any mailing list or to any one
    at the openbsd.org site have been either delayed many hours/days or have
    not been lost or rejected after several days. I smarthost e-mail through
    my ISP, so I do not know if they are held up at my ISP or at openbsd.org.

    Posting to misc@ would be too large an audience, and flood my cable
    modem, I am currently storing these compressed .iso files locally. This
    particular Usenet group isn't used actively by large numbers of people.

    My links:

    www.jggimi.homeip.net/livecd/faq.html
    www.jggimi.homeip.net/livecd/downloads.html

    Links at bsdforums.org:

    Poll results :
    http://www.bsdforums.org/forums/poll...lts&pollid=151
    Discussion thread:
    http://www.bsdforums.org/forums/showthread.php?t=46539

    --
    Replying directly will get you locally blacklisted.
    Change the address; use my first name in front of the @ if you want to
    communicate privately.


  2. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    Josh Grosse wrote:

    > www.jggimi.homeip.net/livecd/faq.html
    > www.jggimi.homeip.net/livecd/downloads.html


    It is interesting. I'll try your work.
    Then send you feedbaks.
    ciao

    --
    No (\) Binary Blob!
    vim -c ":%s/^/xofdotyhtjlmvg/|:%s/[d]/@/Ig|:%s/jlm/./Ig|:normal ggVGg?"


  3. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 13:12:08 -0500, Josh Grosse wrote:

    > A LiveCD like this allows a new user to make a test of the OS without
    > having to ever touch a hard drive, find spare hardware, or build a
    > virtual machine testbed.


    This is a tremendously strong point. The single reason why Ubuntu has
    rocketed to the top of the popularity lists in the Linux world is that the
    system is installed from the liveCD. Ergo, one knows that all the
    hardware is working before installing the system. Ergo, one saves a hell
    of a lot of time.

    You don't list it as a FAQ, but what are the minimum requirements for the
    liveCD to boot and run? LiveCDs normally require more resources than the
    system they are based on. (It hasn't been asked frequently, but it has
    now been asked at least once :-)

    If you were ever going to add any other CDs to your already generous
    selection, may I suggest something with a window manager between dear
    anorexic old fvwm and the increasingly obese XFCE? The likes of
    Windowmaker and Enlightenment always seemed to me to be philosphically
    more in line with OpenBSD, in the sense of providing a lot of power,
    efficency, and configurability without a lot of useless garbage (no
    names mentioned :-) added.

    Cheers,
    Mark
    --
    Signature is believed to be lying on a beach in Fiji.

  4. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    >>>>> "mark" == mark south writes:

    mark> The single reason why Ubuntu has rocketed to the top of the popularity
    mark> lists in the Linux world is that the system is installed from the
    mark> liveCD.

    I'll disagree with this. It's far more than the liveCD. Ubuntu is designed
    from the get-go to default and automate everything that might require
    greater-than-average (read: "sysadmin") knowledge as much as possible.

    Consider my experiences playing with Parallels (essentially, vmware for
    the Mac).

    I downloaded the Ubuntu live CD distro, and booted it on a new virtual
    machine. It went live, and I was able to surf the net. I then selected the
    friendly installer, it asked me only for the time zone for the installation,
    and when I "rebooted", there was my working system. It autoprobed for the
    available disk space and devices, and gave me a reasonable layout. I still
    boot this image about once a week for the friendly security updates, which
    again, just do the right thing for me. It's the closest thing I've *ever*
    experienced to being a mac user.

    Next, I downloaded the Kubuntu live CD distro (KDE + Ubuntu). The experience
    was similar, *until* the time that I needed to set the timezone. It popped up
    an error "must be administrative user". Yeah, I knew that, and Ubuntu at that
    point had simply asked me for my password, and move on. But Kubuntu provided
    no obvious way for me to go into "administrative mode" even after 10 to 15
    minutes of poking around. I gave up. Files went to the trash.

    Finally, I downloaded an unofficial OpenBSD installation .iso. I popped it
    into the virtual CD, and booted. I don't remember the exact sequence, but to
    proceed with the installation, I needed to understand "disk layout geometry"
    and "partition types". Even after staring at the installation FAQ online for
    about 20 minutes, I gave up. I just kept saying "Ubuntu had a default for
    this... just do the right thing, dammit!". So now, the file is in the trash.

    I realize this experience was with an unofficial distro, but I hope this
    illustrates the distance OpenBSD would have to go to be accepted as
    mainstream. It's not just "a live CD". It also has to be dirt simple to
    install. If you have to ask someone what disk layout they want, you've lost.
    If you have to tell someone to edit a config file, you've lost. I consider it
    already a failure of Ubuntu that to get out of 1024x768, I needed to carefully
    edit some file in /etc/x11.conf, and don't know why it didn't just autoconf
    somehow from the list of virtual sizes my "hardware" provided.

    LiveCD. Not the single reason. One of many reasons. Don't think
    this is all you'd have to do to "fix" the popularity of OpenBSD.

    --
    Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095

    Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
    See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  5. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 12:19:21 +0100, mark south wrote:

    > On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 13:12:08 -0500, Josh Grosse wrote:
    >
    >> A LiveCD like this allows a new user to make a test of the OS without
    >> having to ever touch a hard drive, find spare hardware, or build a
    >> virtual machine testbed.

    >
    > This is a tremendously strong point. The single reason why Ubuntu has
    > rocketed to the top of the popularity lists in the Linux world is that the
    > system is installed from the liveCD. Ergo, one knows that all the
    > hardware is working before installing the system. Ergo, one saves a hell
    > of a lot of time.


    Yeah, you can test with cd40.iso, but ... if you have something that is
    shown as "not configured" -- you don't know if its due to a missing
    driver, or a slightly modified chipset, or an unsupported device ---
    unless you research the list of supported chipsets carefully, and perhaps,
    STFAs. Even then, you're not quite sure.

    You raise a good point. These LiveCDs are not "installable" -- I should
    add a statement to that effect in the FAQ. Anyone coming directly from
    Mepis or Ubuntu or similar Linux distros might assume it.

    > You don't list it as a FAQ, but what are the minimum requirements for the
    > liveCD to boot and run? LiveCDs normally require more resources than the
    > system they are based on. (It hasn't been asked frequently, but it has
    > now been asked at least once :-)


    First time.

    But a good question. How much RAM is needed? There are
    plenty of old Win98 machines out there with relatively little.

    I just tried the basic LiveCD in a 32MB qemu, and it ran out of memory
    while finishing up loading everything into MFS. I bumped up to 48M,
    logged in, and found I had *less than 2M* free when running top, and only
    top.

    I didn't bother trying to start X. I will bump up to 64M and see what
    happens when I try to start X. I will also experiment with the XFCE and
    Gnome CDs, and come up with recommendations for them, as well.

    I will post results and update the FAQ with that information, too. Thanks
    for thinking of this!

    > If you were ever going to add any other CDs to your already generous
    > selection, may I suggest something with a window manager between dear
    > anorexic old fvwm and the increasingly obese XFCE? The likes of
    > Windowmaker and Enlightenment always seemed to me to be philosphically
    > more in line with OpenBSD, in the sense of providing a lot of power,
    > efficency, and configurability without a lot of useless garbage (no
    > names mentioned :-) added.


    Thank you for the suggestion. Obviously, I can't please everyone, but I
    may consider something smaller than XFCE but still usable. FYI,
    XFCE adds 91MB (uncompressed) to the ISO, and Firefox -- if I add it
    -- adds an additional 36MB. Taking a look at the poll results as I type
    this, 17/34 selected XFCE, 1/34 selected a window manager I *don't* have
    available.

    I selected Gnome and KDE because newbies are most likely to be familiar
    with 'em, and I selected XFCE only because it is relatively small and
    light. (Note that there is an Xubuntu LiveCD.)

    I happen to use XFCE today, primarily because I was able to get XFCE
    working for me on a 64MB system when I first started playing with OpenBSD
    a few years ago. Experience breeds complacency.

    --------

    Andreas posted to misc@ yesterday regarding the cdboot trouble with KDE;
    perhaps we'll be able to find a fix and have a KDE LiveDVD for those who
    want it. I don't use KDE, but I want to make it available to those that
    do.

    --
    Replying directly will get you locally blacklisted.
    Change the address; use my first name in front of the @ if you want to
    communicate privately.


  6. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 07:37:59 -0800, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:

    > ...Don't think
    > this is all you'd have to do to "fix" the popularity of OpenBSD.


    Just to be clear, my LiveCDs are also unofficial. But, they do not
    install, and they are not for the purpose of advocating OpenBSD to the
    masses.

    They were published merely to make testing of the OS easier to
    conduct, prior to making a decision on whether or not to perform a
    standard i386 installation.

    The OpenBSD Project has no interest in taking over the world, or winning
    any popularity contests.

    I should probably add this to my FAQ, too.

    --
    Replying directly will get you locally blacklisted.
    Change the address; use my first name in front of the @ if you want to
    communicate privately.


  7. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
    >>>>>> "mark" == mark south writes:

    >
    > mark> The single reason why Ubuntu has rocketed to the top of the popularity
    > mark> lists in the Linux world is that the system is installed from the
    > mark> liveCD.
    >
    > I'll disagree with this. It's far more than the liveCD. Ubuntu is designed
    > from the get-go to default and automate everything that might require
    > greater-than-average (read: "sysadmin") knowledge as much as possible.
    >

    [...]
    > Finally, I downloaded an unofficial OpenBSD installation .iso. I popped it
    > into the virtual CD, and booted. I don't remember the exact sequence, but to
    > proceed with the installation, I needed to understand "disk layout geometry"
    > and "partition types". Even after staring at the installation FAQ online for
    > about 20 minutes, I gave up. I just kept saying "Ubuntu had a default for
    > this... just do the right thing, dammit!". So now, the file is in the trash.
    >
    > I realize this experience was with an unofficial distro, but I hope this
    > illustrates the distance OpenBSD would have to go to be accepted as
    > mainstream. It's not just "a live CD". It also has to be dirt simple to
    > install. If you have to ask someone what disk layout they want, you've lost.
    > If you have to tell someone to edit a config file, you've lost. I consider it
    > already a failure of Ubuntu that to get out of 1024x768, I needed to carefully
    > edit some file in /etc/x11.conf, and don't know why it didn't just autoconf
    > somehow from the list of virtual sizes my "hardware" provided.
    >

    I'm sure you have considered this, but I don't think anyone who is
    involved with official OpenBSD releases cares at all if it is considered
    mainstream. These people aren't interested in OS popularity contests,
    and are unlikely to be convinced otherwise. Suggestions for changes to
    make the installer more pretty without adding functionality or security
    will be met with stony silence (if you are lucky).

    OpenBSD is a powerful, hard and sharp tool that can cut you. It won't
    deliberately cut, and care is taken to make sure basic safety features
    are in place. If you play with sharp tools, use caution and expect to
    be cut at least once. There is no way anyone is likely to convince the
    powers-that-be anything otherwise.

    The fact is that the target audience for OpenBSD (by definition, people
    like Theo and company) understand things like partitions and disk
    details, and want to see _exactly_ what the installer is doing.

    A live CD is sort of like a sheath for this dangerous tool, which is
    fine for trying things out, but pleading for an easier but less powerful
    installer is probably not going to fly at all.

    By all mean, you can use OpenBSD for anything you like: it is
    free-as-in-speech. As Theo puts it, you can use it to make bombs to
    drop on whatever and whomever you like, or make a live CD, and there is
    not much he (or anyone) can say or do about it.

    As long as the live CD does not violate copyright (e.g., the official CD
    layout) it would make a great introduction to the system. I personally
    feel that all one needs is a cheap standalone box to play with, instead,
    but if this is a roadblock for someone who is happier with a live CD, so
    be it.

  8. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    Clever Monkey wrote:
    [snip]
    > As long as the live CD does not violate copyright (e.g., the official CD
    > layout) it would make a great introduction to the system. I personally
    > feel that all one needs is a cheap standalone box to play with, instead,
    > but if this is a roadblock for someone who is happier with a live CD, so
    > be it.


    My main use for a livecd is when I'm going to go purchase a new machine.
    I think it's *really* useful to be able to take the CD, plonk it into
    a box, and say "Does all the hardware that I care about work correctly?"

    Most computer stores won't let you install an OS on their floor models,
    but local (non chain, generally) ones will let you run a CD if you have
    any ability to assure them it won't screw up their Windoze install...

    I did this many years ago with a QNX 4 "livecd" when I went to purchase
    a portable for a road trip (last minute). It took three machines until
    I found one I was happy with (of course it was the most expensive one).

    Cheers,
    -RK

    --
    Robert Krten, Antique computer collector looking for PDP-8 and PDP-8/S
    minicomputers; check out their "good home" at www.parse.com/~museum
    Email address is valid; greylisting spam filter in effect.

  9. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    Robert Krten wrote:
    > Clever Monkey wrote:
    > [snip]
    >> As long as the live CD does not violate copyright (e.g., the official CD
    >> layout) it would make a great introduction to the system. I personally
    >> feel that all one needs is a cheap standalone box to play with, instead,
    >> but if this is a roadblock for someone who is happier with a live CD, so
    >> be it.

    >
    > My main use for a livecd is when I'm going to go purchase a new machine.
    > I think it's *really* useful to be able to take the CD, plonk it into
    > a box, and say "Does all the hardware that I care about work correctly?"
    >

    Of all the reasons for a live CD, this one actually makes the most
    amount of sense to me. Though, when shopping for new hardware I usually
    check the (admittedly, not always up-to-date) OBSD supported hardware
    guide, first.

    But a sanity check and clean dmesg says more than all the research in
    the world.

  10. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    Josh Grosse written:

    > Over the holidays, I began thinking about producing simple LiveCDs with
    > little other than the OS on them, and around the new year began building a
    > few different variations, with a FAQ.
    >
    > "Why?" is Q1:
    >
    > To allow curious people the opportunity to try out an OpenBSD environment
    > without actually installing it, simply as a public service. A LiveCD like
    > this allows a new user to make a test of the OS without having to ever
    > touch a hard drive, find spare hardware, or build a virtual machine
    > testbed.
    >
    > The OpenBSD Project does not appear to have any direct interest in this
    > form of advocacy, though LiveCDs have been produced over time by members
    > of the community at-large for a wide variety of reasons. Those made
    > available to the public that I've seen have been special-purpose builds,
    > and not the default, generic OpenBSD.
    >
    > The OpenBSD install process is quick and easy. But, for the new user,
    > the process of doing the install can be intimidating -- and possibly
    > risks reinstall of a previously installed OS on a multiboot machine --
    > due to the need for some manual disk partitioning. On many popular
    > architectures, OpenBSD uses both MBR partitions and BSD disklabels, and
    > for someone who does not regularly deal with hard drives and their
    > Cylinder, Head, and Sector addressing, this can add additional confusion.
    >
    > To measure interest, I began a discussion thread in the OpenBSD section of
    > bsdforums.org, which is *extremely* newbie focused. Until today, I hadn't
    > made any links public.
    >
    > Now, due to a FreeBSD user who wanted to switch but could not install due
    > to missing drivers in bsd.rd, I decided to go ahead and make links to FAQ
    > and download pages public.
    >
    > The poll associated with the bsdforums.org thread was interesting; 10%
    > don't want a LiveCD made available at all ("we don't need no stinkin'
    > Newbies!").
    >
    > I would think if I posted a similar poll on misc@, a much higher
    > percentage would say they agree with that, to avoid polluting the mailing
    > lists with questions from people who can neither RTFM nor RTFA, which is
    > pretty much the case for many questions on bsdforums.org.
    >
    > Even so, there are still valuable reasons to make more than bsd.rd
    > available for boot.
    >
    > I am posting here, primarily to reach a different audience. I am
    > interested in feedback and suggestions from experienced OpenBSD users. So
    > far, private beta testers have been noobs. I would post on advocacy@, but
    > for some reason, my recent e-mails to any mailing list or to any one
    > at the openbsd.org site have been either delayed many hours/days or have
    > not been lost or rejected after several days. I smarthost e-mail through
    > my ISP, so I do not know if they are held up at my ISP or at openbsd.org.
    >
    > Posting to misc@ would be too large an audience, and flood my cable
    > modem, I am currently storing these compressed .iso files locally. This
    > particular Usenet group isn't used actively by large numbers of people.
    >
    > My links:
    >
    > www.jggimi.homeip.net/livecd/faq.html
    > www.jggimi.homeip.net/livecd/downloads.html
    >
    > Links at bsdforums.org:
    >
    > Poll results :
    > http://www.bsdforums.org/forums/poll...lts&pollid=151
    > Discussion thread:
    > http://www.bsdforums.org/forums/showthread.php?t=46539
    >


    Can I ask that the KDE, Gnome, XFCE and all the other big desktop
    system/window managers are deleted from the port system????
    Why there are always people that want help others with these things???
    New user should not use OpenBSD if they don't undestand what they do!
    FreeBSD user should continue to use FreeBSD, not OpenBSD!
    I've chosen OpenBSD for this absence of stupid things!
    Why there is still people that doesn't understand this???

    Manuel

    P.S.: Oh, if someone read the headers: in my notebook, as development
    platform/desktop, I use OpenBSD. Here I use windows/thunderbird, I need
    if for some trouble with my isp and the P2P.

  11. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    Clever Monkey written:

    >> My main use for a livecd is when I'm going to go purchase a new machine.
    >> I think it's *really* useful to be able to take the CD, plonk it into
    >> a box, and say "Does all the hardware that I care about work correctly?"
    >>

    > Of all the reasons for a live CD, this one actually makes the most
    > amount of sense to me. Though, when shopping for new hardware I usually
    > check the (admittedly, not always up-to-date) OBSD supported hardware
    > guide, first.
    >
    > But a sanity check and clean dmesg says more than all the research in
    > the world.


    Burn:
    ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.0/i386/cd40.iso
    and you'll have your live cd for the hardware check!
    These kind of live cd are USELESS!
    Manuel

  12. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    On 2007-01-18, Manuel wrote:
    > Clever Monkey written:
    >
    >>> My main use for a livecd is when I'm going to go purchase a new machine.
    >>> I think it's *really* useful to be able to take the CD, plonk it into
    >>> a box, and say "Does all the hardware that I care about work correctly?"
    >>>

    >> Of all the reasons for a live CD, this one actually makes the most
    >> amount of sense to me. Though, when shopping for new hardware I usually
    >> check the (admittedly, not always up-to-date) OBSD supported hardware
    >> guide, first.
    >>
    >> But a sanity check and clean dmesg says more than all the research in
    >> the world.

    >
    > Burn:
    > ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.0/i386/cd40.iso
    > and you'll have your live cd for the hardware check!
    > These kind of live cd are USELESS!
    > Manuel


    And how will the standard ISO distribution tell me that hardware will
    work with the various X windows systems I'd like to use?

    From my perspective, these kind of live CD are not entirely useless.

    --
    ratfood@food.skaterat.net
    All foods should be removed to reply

  13. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    John McGrail ha scritto:
    > On 2007-01-18, Manuel wrote:
    >
    >>Clever Monkey written:
    >>
    >>
    >>>>My main use for a livecd is when I'm going to go purchase a new machine.
    >>>>I think it's *really* useful to be able to take the CD, plonk it into
    >>>>a box, and say "Does all the hardware that I care about work correctly?"
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>Of all the reasons for a live CD, this one actually makes the most
    >>>amount of sense to me. Though, when shopping for new hardware I usually
    >>>check the (admittedly, not always up-to-date) OBSD supported hardware
    >>>guide, first.
    >>>
    >>>But a sanity check and clean dmesg says more than all the research in
    >>>the world.

    >>
    >>Burn:
    >>ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.0/i386/cd40.iso
    >>and you'll have your live cd for the hardware check!
    >>These kind of live cd are USELESS!
    >> Manuel

    >
    >
    > And how will the standard ISO distribution tell me that hardware will
    > work with the various X windows systems I'd like to use?
    >
    > From my perspective, these kind of live CD are not entirely useless.
    >


    Oh, you can use the vesa driver with X, so every video card will work
    and you'll get the 1024x768 resolution (if the card has enough memory,
    otherwise there is the vga driver).
    I use this, cause the video card of my notebook isn't supported.

    Manuel

  14. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 19:56:18 +0000, Manuel wrote:

    > Can I ask that the KDE, Gnome, XFCE and all the other big desktop
    > system/window managers are deleted from the port system????


    Sure you can ask, but this is probably not the best place to ask. Ask
    on the ports@ mailing list, instead. But I do not understand why you
    care what desktop someone wants to use. While I don't use KDE, I know
    several OpenBSD admins who use and like KDE, and I happen to use gaim so I
    need some Gnome dependencies myself.

    There are more than 4000 ports in the tree. If you don't like a
    particular one, then don't use it. If you don't want them in *your*
    particular checkout of the ports tree, don't check them out, or delete
    them.

    > Why there are always people that want help others with these things???
    > New user should not use OpenBSD if they don't undestand what they do!
    > FreeBSD user should continue to use FreeBSD, not OpenBSD! I've chosen
    > OpenBSD for this absence of stupid things! Why there is still people
    > that doesn't understand this???


    Because even if you do not want new users, you will get them. Since I
    answer many newbie questions regularly, I would rather answer them from
    someone who has actually used the OS for 15 or 20 minutes, or even a week,
    then from someone who doesn't have a clue how to obtain a dmesg. Don't
    worry, the majority of new users don't post to misc@, only the bravest or
    most stupid.

    > P.S.: Oh, if someone read the headers: in my notebook, as development
    > platform/desktop, I use OpenBSD. Here I use windows/thunderbird, I need
    > if for some trouble with my isp and the P2P.


    You use Windows and you berate others who use other "integrated" desktop
    environs? T-bird for newsreading?

    PKB :-P

    --
    Replying directly will get you locally blacklisted.
    Change the address; use my first name in front of the @ if you want to
    communicate privately.


  15. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 20:09:12 +0000, Manuel wrote:

    > Burn:
    > ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.0/i386/cd40.iso
    > and you'll have your live cd for the hardware check!
    > These kind of live cd are USELESS!
    > Manuel


    The RAMDISK_CD kernel does not have the same set of drivers as GENERIC,
    and therefore this is not equivalent to booting GENERIC.

    You might have missed ,
    where I wrote:

    > Yeah, you can test with cd40.iso, but ... if you have something that is
    > shown as "not configured" -- you don't know if its due to a missing
    > driver, or a slightly modified chipset, or an unsupported device ---
    > unless you research the list of supported chipsets carefully, and perhaps,
    > STFAs. Even then, you're not quite sure.




    --
    Replying directly will get you locally blacklisted.
    Change the address; use my first name in front of the @ if you want to
    communicate privately.


  16. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    Josh Grosse ha scritto:

    >>Can I ask that the KDE, Gnome, XFCE and all the other big desktop
    >>system/window managers are deleted from the port system????


    > Sure you can ask, but this is probably not the best place to ask. Ask
    > on the ports@ mailing list, instead. But I do not understand why you
    > care what desktop someone wants to use. While I don't use KDE, I know
    > several OpenBSD admins who use and like KDE, and I happen to use gaim so I
    > need some Gnome dependencies myself.


    Yes I know this, but I believe there is a philosophy under the OpenBSD
    development, so I think these desktop system go against it.
    Too fancy, too knobs...

    http://www.openbsd.org/papers/openco.../mgp00023.html

    Here said to make the things just work.
    I don't mind which desktop other use, but with these, there is more
    chances that a lot of people that doesn't understand/know this philosopy
    come here with some strange ideas to help the others.

    > There are more than 4000 ports in the tree. If you don't like a
    > particular one, then don't use it. If you don't want them in *your*
    > particular checkout of the ports tree, don't check them out, or delete
    > them.


    Of course...

    >>Why there are always people that want help others with these things???
    >>New user should not use OpenBSD if they don't undestand what they do!
    >>FreeBSD user should continue to use FreeBSD, not OpenBSD! I've chosen
    >>OpenBSD for this absence of stupid things! Why there is still people
    >>that doesn't understand this???


    > Because even if you do not want new users, you will get them. Since I
    > answer many newbie questions regularly, I would rather answer them from
    > someone who has actually used the OS for 15 or 20 minutes, or even a week,
    > then from someone who doesn't have a clue how to obtain a dmesg. Don't
    > worry, the majority of new users don't post to misc@, only the bravest or
    > most stupid.


    Someone can post on the misc with a obvios question also if he's not
    stupid... But if he want learn etc, ok! But then he has to understand
    what kind of system OpenBSD is, not ask for things that the system
    doesn't have... If he doesn't like, go to another OS, there are so many
    other OS for this...

    >>P.S.: Oh, if someone read the headers: in my notebook, as development
    >>platform/desktop, I use OpenBSD. Here I use windows/thunderbird, I need
    >>if for some trouble with my isp and the P2P.


    > You use Windows and you berate others who use other "integrated" desktop
    > environs? T-bird for newsreading?


    Yes, but I don't berate others who use "integrated" desktop, I berate
    others who use the system for things that are against the purpose for
    which OpenBSD exist.
    In fact I also use windows, as desktop system is the best, but... It
    exist for this... I use OpenBSD for development platform becouse...
    It's a system for programmers! (I've read someone tell this also)
    I use it also as desktop becouse... I like to do things with the
    console/command line, but I berate who want do things like in windows in
    a system as OpenBSD, and your live cd can help people to do this kind of
    things (in my opinion).
    Manuel

  17. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    Josh Grosse ha scritto:

    >>Burn:
    >>ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.0/i386/cd40.iso
    >>and you'll have your live cd for the hardware check!
    >>These kind of live cd are USELESS!
    >> Manuel


    > The RAMDISK_CD kernel does not have the same set of drivers as GENERIC,
    > and therefore this is not equivalent to booting GENERIC.


    And if you use the cdrom40.fs?

    "The i386 boot and installation 2.88MB
    floppy image that contains almost all OpenBSD
    drivers; see below."

    Almost all can help?
    And there is the "Supported hardware include:" list,
    in ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/4.0/i386/INSTALL.i386 file,
    so you can read there, while you are burning the iso.
    Manuel

  18. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 21:04:59 +0000, Manuel wrote:

    > Yes I know this, but I believe there is a philosophy under the OpenBSD
    > development, so I think these desktop system go against it.
    > Too fancy, too knobs...
    >
    > http://www.openbsd.org/papers/openco.../mgp00023.html
    >
    > Here said to make the things just work.


    You are looking at Jonathan Gray's (jsg@) presentation specific to kernel
    driver development. This is unrelated to ports.

    The goals of the Project are very clear:

    * development platform
    * code quality
    * security
    * crypto
    * standards
    * multiplicity of architectures
    * politics free
    * developer oriented
    * resolve serious problems
    * external packages (ports) should have minimal modification, and
    submit changes back to 3rd parties.
    * obtain funding

    Nowhere in this list does it say "Keep stinkin' uninformed newbies away,
    if they can't install it they shouldn't use it."

    The Project, on misc@ has publicly said to many new users, often without
    any gentleness, "If you are unable to install, administrate, or support
    our OS, but still wish to use it, please contract with any of the
    commercial support organizations published on our website." Usually, the
    way that is phrased is much less polite.

    Commercial support is still an option.

    This particular set of .iso files does not provide any non-standard
    install tools. I happen to leave bsd.rd is in the root directory.
    If the user discovers and boots that kernel, they have nothing
    different than what is in cd40.iso or cdrom40.fs

    > I don't mind which desktop other use...


    Your first post in this thread recommended removing them from the tree.
    You cannot have it both ways if you want to argue your point successfully
    with me.

    >... but with these, there is more
    > chances that a lot of people that doesn't understand/know this philosopy
    > come here with some strange ideas to help the others.


    They still have not installed the OS. They have only booted it.

    > Someone can post on the misc with a obvios question also if he's not
    > stupid... But if he want learn etc, ok! But then he has to understand
    > what kind of system OpenBSD is, not ask for things that the system
    > doesn't have... If he doesn't like, go to another OS, there are so many
    > other OS for this...


    As I said, I answer many newbie questions, constantly. Some are able to
    "get it," others are not.

    But the project's goals are obviously not the same as yours.

    > Yes, but I don't berate others who use "integrated" desktop, I berate
    > others who use the system for things that are against the purpose for
    > which OpenBSD exist.


    I do not understand how having a non-installable LiveCD provides for the
    purpose of familarization, or hardware testing, provides anything which
    violates the goals of the project.

    --
    Replying directly will get you locally blacklisted.
    Change the address; use my first name in front of the @ if you want to
    communicate privately.


  19. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    Manuel wrote:
    > Josh Grosse ha scritto:
    >>>Can I ask that the KDE, Gnome, XFCE and all the other big desktop
    >>>system/window managers are deleted from the port system????


    >>>Why there are always people that want help others with these things???
    >>>New user should not use OpenBSD if they don't undestand what they do!
    >>>FreeBSD user should continue to use FreeBSD, not OpenBSD! I've chosen
    >>>OpenBSD for this absence of stupid things! Why there is still people
    >>>that doesn't understand this???

    >
    >> Because even if you do not want new users, you will get them. Since I
    >> answer many newbie questions regularly, I would rather answer them from
    >> someone who has actually used the OS for 15 or 20 minutes, or even a week,
    >> then from someone who doesn't have a clue how to obtain a dmesg. Don't
    >> worry, the majority of new users don't post to misc@, only the bravest or
    >> most stupid.

    >
    > Someone can post on the misc with a obvios question also if he's not
    > stupid... But if he want learn etc, ok! But then he has to understand
    > what kind of system OpenBSD is, not ask for things that the system
    > doesn't have... If he doesn't like, go to another OS, there are so many
    > other OS for this...


    Why? There is no technical or 'philosophical' reason not to 'allow' KDE.
    Certainly, there are downsides to it and quite a few OpenBSD users use
    very different window managers - I'm using ion, and the only graphical
    app I use with any regularity is Firefox - but that's no reason to
    disallow it.

    In short, KDE sucks, but if people want to use it and maintain it, why
    not?

    >>>P.S.: Oh, if someone read the headers: in my notebook, as development
    >>>platform/desktop, I use OpenBSD. Here I use windows/thunderbird, I need
    >>>if for some trouble with my isp and the P2P.

    >
    >> You use Windows and you berate others who use other "integrated" desktop
    >> environs? T-bird for newsreading?

    >
    > Yes, but I don't berate others who use "integrated" desktop, I berate
    > others who use the system for things that are against the purpose for
    > which OpenBSD exist.
    > In fact I also use windows, as desktop system is the best, but... It
    > exist for this... I use OpenBSD for development platform becouse...
    > It's a system for programmers! (I've read someone tell this also)
    > I use it also as desktop becouse... I like to do things with the
    > console/command line, but I berate who want do things like in windows in
    > a system as OpenBSD, and your live cd can help people to do this kind of
    > things (in my opinion).


    Yes, OpenBSD does attract the more technical user (or repel the less
    technical, as the case may be). A good argument can be made that this
    attractiveness should not be compromised to pander to other groups - for
    example, putting KDE in the base install would not be appreciated by the
    majority of the userbase.

    However, that's no reason not to allow KDE. In fact, it wouldn't hurt
    OpenBSD to be seen as slightly more user-friendly [1].

    Joachim

    [1] Never mind the fact that it actually is very user-friendly -
    provided you are the right sort of user.

  20. Re: OpenBSD LiveCD -- public beta

    On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 11:15:42 -0500, I wrote:

    > I just tried the basic LiveCD in a 32MB qemu, and it ran out of memory
    > while finishing up loading everything into MFS. I bumped up to 48M,
    > logged in, and found I had *less than 2M* free when running top, and only
    > top.
    >
    > I didn't bother trying to start X. I will bump up to 64M and see what
    > happens when I try to start X. I will also experiment with the XFCE and
    > Gnome CDs, and come up with recommendations for them, as well.
    >
    > I will post results and update the FAQ with that information, too. Thanks
    > for thinking of this!


    The FAQ has been updated with a minimum memory table for all but the KDE
    builds. For convenience, here is a link:

    http://jggimi.homeip.net/livecd/faq.html

    --
    Replying directly will get you locally blacklisted.
    Change the address; use my first name in front of the @ if you want to
    communicate privately.


+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast