Paul Johnson wrote:
If I am reading thing correctly, the live-usb setup uses a compressed image like the live-cd does, plus a memory overlay to hold changes/upgrades. So it would tend to let you pack more programs on the USB memory stick, at least before you do a lot of updates. But there may be a performance hit using the compressed file system.I saw the announcement that F9 supports the live-usb install. Apparently, (sounds like magic), the live-usb install can go onto a usb stick and then rpms can be upgraded on that disk without blowing anything up. Since the live-usb is a compressed file system, I'm surprised this works. Until now, I've been installing Fedora on USB devices through the ordinary approach. It only takes a bit of care with the initrd creation to make sure a system starts off the usb. The system is not compressed into such a small space as the live-usb image, but it works fine. Question: does the live-usb approach have other benefits or costs I'm not aware of? If I have an 80 Gig hard disk, is there any benefit to live-usb? The live-usb approach looks easier to maintain, one probably does not have to do a lot of manual adjustment to grub.conf or such. What else?
I can not see a lot of advantage, and a lot of disadvantage using it on an 80 gb hard drive.
Mikkel -- Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
