On Fri, 2008-03-07 at 13:51 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Jesse Keating (jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > > On Fri, 2008-03-07 at 18:38 +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > > > > > Do we really have to rename it ? When doing fullvirtualized installs from > > > an ISO using a network URL, our tools look for $URL/images/boot.iso - if it > > > gets renamed, then existing distros won't be able to install F9 in this > > > manner :-( > > > > Yes, as it's different. It now includes stage2 on it, it was the > > rescue.iso but renamed as it does more than just rescue. > > It's not significantly different. It's still the only boot iso. The name is still open for discussion... renaming it to make the difference clear at first is important, but the virt-inst reason might be a good enough one to change it back Jeremy -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
