Also, for your information, nothing about syslinux was rejected. It is simply not part of the base DVD which livecd-creator requires to be in the target package payload to build a live image. Since this is the case, one cannot even do repetitive testing via scripting methods without using --cache or having a network configured.
Bruno mentioned it is not important to him, and likewise, since we are talking about space I figured I would mention the opinion he gave on syslinux. Try researching before you assume you know what anyone is talking about. This is my original message to the list: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/livecd/2010-May/005828.html Since Bruno feels it is only an issue which I face and you both seem to think I cannot do for myself what you keep suggesting, you are simply enveloped in your own ideas of what you think livecd-creator should be, or what this list is for, or even why I'm posting the message. Read this again: _Anyone_ who builds a LiveCD or LiveDVD with livecd-creator will be required to have a network repository or a local mirror in place to do even the simplest of repetitive testing. Read this again: Anyone_. That means you too, and Bruno, even if that makes 2 people of the several billion on the planet who don't give a flying chicken limb about it. So guess what? I am free to post my opinions on why adding squash with lzma is a bad idea, and yes I am glad you like to generalize it to "omgz instability" which also shows me how much you fail to read or understand simple things like more fundamental problems than 10% savings on a media. You said it yourself. You would like it if you could have gained 10%, guess what, who cares!! I got DVDRW discs out the ying yang, and my network bandwidth at home is plenty!! Look further ahead next time when making comments on my posts. > > The two counter-arguments seem to be: > > (1) that syslinux was rejected, which is small; -- livecd mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/livecd
