Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] Rename proposal of alpine .ISOs

From: 7heo <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 14:16:56 +0200

>Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 1:46 PM
>From: "Alan Pillay" <[email-masked]>
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: [alpine-devel] Rename proposal of alpine .ISOs
>The current Standard" .iso" on http://www.alpinelinux.org/downloads/
>is of the alpine Linux distribution + lots of packages to use it as a
>router/firewall/etc as was alpine's first goal. However, I think most
>people nowadays don't use it like that anymore. Also, there's nothing
>in the name to indicate the "Standard" .iso"comes with all those
>things. Because of that most people downloading alpine are installing
>many packages they never touch. What they actually are looking for is
>probably the "Mini" .iso. Not only that, but the "Vanilla" .iso is the
>"Mini" .iso with linux vanilla kernel, but there's nothing to indicate
>that, and it looks like Vanilla is the "Standard" .iso with some
>modifications.
>With all this put, I propose the following:
>
>Standard -> Network (Router/Firewall/VPN/VoIP/etc)
>Mini -> Standard
>
>What does everyone think?
>I believe this is what makes the most sense now that Alpine is a
>general purpose distribution.
>
>Thanks for your time.
>
>
>---
>Unsubscribe: [email-masked]
>Help: [email-masked]
>---

I would also get rid of the iso format as the main one, as nobody burns installation medias anymore. It would be much better to have a dd'able installation image.

---
Unsubscribe:  [email-masked]
Help:         [email-masked]
---

---

From: Natanael Copa <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 20:25:20 +0200

On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 14:16:56 +0200
7heo <[email-masked]> wrote:
 
> I would also get rid of the iso format as the main one, as nobody
> burns installation medias anymore. It would be much better to have a
> dd'able installation image.

The .iso format has only served as an archive format, which you can
easily boot directly in qemu.

You can also use 7zip in windows to extract the files and run
syslinux.exe. I doubt that is ever done though.

Maybe a dd'able isohybrid or something would work?

But we will also need some storage on the bootable media in case you
want to run diskeless. for some storage on dd'able boot media from
isohybrid would require user to create a second partition for apkovl.

If we have an dd'able boot image with vfat file system we will also
need add a second partition for apkovl as fat does not support resize.

If we do dd'able boot media that is not fat, but ext4 or similar, then
we lose the ability to copy the apkovl on a windows system.

For UEFI we will probably need separate boot partition on fat anyway?

Is it possible to create a dd'able image file which has a GPT which can
resize the data storage partition?

-nc

---

---

From: Isaac Dunham <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 12:49:07 -0700

> syslinux.exe. I doubt that is ever done though.

I always used to extract the ISO in 7zip, then use grub4dos to boot the
files.

> Maybe a dd'able isohybrid or something would work?

I'd really like to see isohybrid used on ISOs, if possible; while it's
not a perfect solution, it's more useful than old-fashioned ISOs.

> need add a second partition for apkovl as fat does not support resize.

*blink* Huh?
fatresize, fips...there *are* ways to split and resize FAT filesystems,
and there have been for 10-20 years (FIPS was from 1995, fatresize from
2005), though the former needs to be packaged and the latter is DOS only.

Don't forget that UDF is another option.

Thanks,
Isaac Dunham

---

---

From: Alan Pillay <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 17:46:37 -0200

I actually still burn .ISO to CD, but maybe that's just me?
An option would be to provide both the .iso and the dd'able image. But
I'm not sure if the developers have enough infrastructure for this
double release.

Discussion has been all about the release format so far, but how do
you guys feel about the proposal of making the MINI image become the
STANDARD image? I think the great majority of people don't use Alpine
as a router/firewall/etc anymore and the current standard image comes
with many programs only a few people use.

---

---

From: Natanael Copa <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 11:38:21 +0200

On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 17:46:37 -0200

> with many programs only a few people use.

I agree that we want make the alpine-mini to the standard image.

The bigger iso image (currently standard) is only useful for diskless
installs where you can have most of the needed packages on the iso. The
question is what we rename it to?

alpine-offline?
alpine-live?

I don't know what would be a good description for it.

Or we only drop it?

-nc

---

---

From: Timo Teras <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 13:00:59 +0300

On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 11:38:21 +0200
Natanael Copa <[email-masked]> wrote:

> > An option would be to provide both the .iso and the dd'able image.
> > But I'm not sure if the developers have enough infrastructure for
> > this double release.
> > 
> > STANDARD image? I think the great majority of people don't use
> > Alpine as a router/firewall/etc anymore and the current standard
> > image comes with many programs only a few people use.
> 
> installs where you can have most of the needed packages on the iso.
> The question is what we rename it to?
> 
> alpine-offline?
> alpine-live?
> 

Probably keep for one release cycle.

After that I'd like to see scripts / mechanism to easily build custom
installation images. Such that we can give apkovl and it gives boot
media back. This would be useful for 'appliance' type setups.

I have no good suggestions for renaming them. But renaming current
standard as 'network' is confusing, since I'd assume 'network' image to
require network for installing everything. Same goes for 'live'.

'offline' sounds best so far. Or maybe just call it 'large' or 'full' ? 

/Timo

---

---

From: lamiaworks <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 11:05:12 +1100

> I would also get rid of the iso format as the main one, as nobody burns installation medias anymore. It would be much better to have a dd'able installation image.

My 2 bits, sorry but I'd like to disagree with this, I find iso format's 
perfect for test and trialing. Also for passing on to windows users as 
they seem to be able to burn them correctly first go.

thanks
scsijon

---