> > Ugh, do we have to? And if so, how automatic is it supposed to be? You > > can already specify an updates image location via updates= or via a > > kickstart command. We also automatically look for one in various > > locations relative to the stage2 image location. If we are > > automatically looking in a driver disk, it seems like we're really > > overloading the driver disk concept in a way that doesn't really make > > sense. After all, what do updates to whatever tree you're installing > > and a driver disk have in common? > > We really want to be able to have a single disk that updates drivers and > supplies any corresponding fixes to the installer, combined with the > fact that a single disk beats having to find several pieces. Again, you're conflating two concepts that don't really have all that much to do with each other. Why should a driver disk also imply an updates image? How do those two concepts tie together at all, besides that someone wants them to? What installer fixes are being anticipated? - Chris _______________________________________________ Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
