On 3/16/06, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Why are we have two different ISO images then? Just get rid of the boot > image and rename, use the rescue image if it serves both the purpose well. I can't answer why the boot.iso is being produced. It is an order of magnitude smaller than the rescuecd.iso and I think its probably being produced to be placed on the fulll iso images to save space. Anyone who has the full media already has a rescue environment and may very well only need to use boot.iso to bring up additional systems locally. I belive the rescuecd.iso is only be available as a seperate image on the mirrors and the torrent and not on the the main isosets. Packing of the isos for space-efficiency always has tradeoffs. I will say the boot.iso fits on the business card sized cds, so it fills a unique media niche but its usefulness is limited. The only time I ever burn a boot.iso personally is when i have full media available locally and I need to spin up more than one nfs based install at the same time, the boot.iso is "small" so i just have it sitting on the harddrive ready to be pushed to a new blank cdr if I need to do a spur-of-the-moment install at work. But since I'm not using business card sized cd's for that it doesn't really matter to me. -jef -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list