Remastering (on-hold)

Hey, I've got a great idea. If we just ....

Remastering (on-hold)

Postby jbv » Sun Aug 12, 2012 10:10 pm

This is a whole can of worms.

With the current filesystem layout and being spread over 2 sqf's, even attempting to remaster becomes real ugly real quick.

Merging both sqf's into a single sqf has a slight advantage int aht it would make remastering possible, although it also has the potential to create other issues down the track. This whole thing needs some discussion.
jbv
 
Posts: 600
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 2:02 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Remastering

Postby saintless » Tue Aug 14, 2012 2:08 pm

I see the remastering option as using live-rw save file and when you have all the programs you need you can create third snapshot and after this delete live-rw save file. The problem is to clean good enough the system before making the third snapshot.
User avatar
saintless
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 7:01 am
Location: Bulgaria

Re: Remastering

Postby jbv » Tue Aug 14, 2012 9:50 pm

Okay, this one is easy enough.

Are you suggesting that we take the "cow" stuff and either create/update/refresh a file that we might call "xx_my_config.squashfs", or merge it into the FoxyRoxy main sqf?

Cheers
jbv
 
Posts: 600
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 2:02 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Remastering

Postby saintless » Wed Aug 15, 2012 5:40 am

I suggest to create a separate third squash file as a remastering option. Remastering is a personal choice and if someone merge the squash files into one after remastering it may create later other problems like need of newer and older version of some dependencies at the same time for different programs.
If the remastering squash file is separate the original FoxyRoxy is always there for clean start.
The live-rw save file is needed to save the changes after reboots until all the programs we like to have are installed and working.
Maybe merging the third remastering squash file with new created remastering squash file later is a good idea.

Cheers
User avatar
saintless
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 7:01 am
Location: Bulgaria

Re: Remastering

Postby jbv » Wed Aug 15, 2012 10:53 am

Got-it ... I think (it's been a long day). I will re-read and digest properly in a day or two.

From first read, makes sense, sounds good, can be done (fairly easily).

... good idea !

Cheers
jbv
 
Posts: 600
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 2:02 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Remastering

Postby jbv » Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:02 pm

Is this <click for link> what you were asking about?

Not super extensive, but I think it might be on the right track ?

Can we consider this one closed for a little while?
jbv
 
Posts: 600
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 2:02 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Remastering

Postby saintless » Sat Aug 18, 2012 7:13 pm

Thanks, JBV,
this need some testing but I guess it will work well for remastering without any unnecessary files included. I will do proper testing of 99-snap and report back.

Edit: 95-snap works fine for remastering desktop and Firefox configuration changes.
User avatar
saintless
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 7:01 am
Location: Bulgaria

Re: Remastering

Postby jbv » Sun Aug 19, 2012 11:47 am

Hi saintless,

I suggest the new and improved 99-snap for Firefox and desktop/network configuration changes.

95-create/refresh/load/save is meant more for working out what to save/trim.
It is the main tool/script I use during development and/or installing new modules/packages.

As each package is different, there is really no way to automate the cleaning process.
I hope that 99-snap will at least allow us to keep a small config .sqf

Cheers
jbv
 
Posts: 600
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 2:02 am
Location: Sydney, Australia


Return to Could we, Should we ?



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron