On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 07:23:31AM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote: > Phillip Susi [2011-06-08 21:52 -0400]: > > One thing that would be nice to fix with the existing DVD image is the > > waste of space it has from duplicating the language packs both as > > packages in the pool, and being installed in the sqashfs live image, > > which is MUCH larger than the one on the livecd.
> I agree, duplicating them is a hideous waste. > > It seems like the language packs should only be included in the > > pool, not the squashfs image, and installed on demand. > I disagree. They should only be in the squashfs image, so that you can > actually _use_ the live system in your local language. Is there any reason that they have to be in the squashfs image to get that effect? I know that's how it's architected today, but would it actually be a better experience to have a much smaller squashfs that needs to be unpacked, to which the correct language pack is applied on-the-fly as soon as we know what language the user has selected? Cons: - have to wait for apt before starting the login session or ubiquity - new code has to be written Pros: - shorter livefs build time - shorter install time - potentially *reusable* squashfs image, that can be extended for new locales just by dropping it on a new ISO including a different package repo Is this worth exploring? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [email protected] [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
