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:
pgpvIpZSjN1JQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
