Should ISO format be retired?

[dellus]

From the discussion going on it might seem Clarity's view is a one person opinion only. It isn't.
I was delighted to learn about the possibility to boot a puppy (or even an ubuntu) simply from the iso, and disappointed if it didn't work with some puppies, lacking that loop device.
Now developers say it is deprecated, complicated, for old timers. I have some understanding for their thinking and don't mind generally switching to img format.
But from a user's perspective it would make me unhappy to lose the ease and flexibility the current system provides.
If with a new format all the existing advantages can be retained all will be fine.
Had to say this.

dellus,
Puppy fan and user since 2.14, not a coder.

[Feek]

I remember my beginnings with Puppy:
I had 1 laptop with win7, unaware of installing any operating systems.
Completely without knowledge of Puppy and Linux as such.
Burning an .iso file to a CD directly with win7's built-in tool was very easy and convenient for a complete novice ...

But anyway, if .iso is retired in the future, I will learn to work with the img format. I see no problem with that.

[rockedge]

@dellus I agree and that is why we still are going to offer Kennel Linux in ISO form. I personally do not like dealing with .img files.

[BarryK]

Just to sir the pot some more, before I head off on summer holiday, have written part-2 on why the iso file should be retired.

Part 1:
https://bkhome.org/news/202112/why-iso-was-retired.html

Part 2:
https://bkhome.org/news/202112/why-iso- ... art-2.html

[dimkr]

I personally do not like dealing with .img files.

Why?

You can dd them to a flash drive, as you do with ISOs. And you can use them as virtual hard drives in QEMU, without converting them to another format.

[8Geee]

Well, one way to shoot ISO n the foot is to bollix the remaster scripting. I've noted this occurance in my travels here. Seems to be a NO FIX solution.

8Geee

[wiak]

The short and sweet of it is that you cannot retire it. It is a standard that you can choose to use or not to use. The discussion is only about alternative distro release methods and the advantages and disadvantages of each. Per usual that becomes "each to their own" choice.

https://www.iso.org/iso-9660-images-for ... files.html

ISO 9660 has given rise to popular use of the term ISO-image, where it is used to refer to an exact snapshot of a disc. Today, the use of ISO images goes beyond their use on actual CDs. For example software, including open source operating systems such as Linux, are often downloaded and transferred to a storage medium such as a USB key using an ISO image. This enables the creation and preservation of perfectly intact file structure.

Even pretty old distros often contain tools for working with isos. Certainly some may have written nice img handling tools, but that's recent and these img tools simply won't be in the older distros many still may use. Time may well change that and iso format become redundant.

[Clarity]

Hi @BarryK y,
On your blog and on this thread you say this:

Of course, someone may still come up with a genuine reason why the iso file is the best choice. Please do post to the forum if you know of such a use-case.

I genuinely hope you hVE a moment to review this.

Before starting, this must be said. "A moderator (God) steps in to tell me any comments from me are cause for dismissal ... on this thread, even as the OP ask for comment."

So with the God's blessing, I, again provide comment to the OP request. My comment is a "genuine reason" based in fact.

My concern, as was expressed earlier practically everywhere, in about an ease of PUP-DOG use that tends to make it simple as well as easy to experience the distro in all its glory with nothing more than ITS mere download.

The origin of this appears in Puppyland by @rcrsn51 with ISObooter. It provided the means to boot Puppy Linux by merely downloading the "ISO" file. "Novel" is one-way of describing this, but I call it "Mensa".
Next up is another "ISO" file boot strategy (a GIT project), SuperGrub2 Disc that boots modern PUPs & DOGs ISO files. It offers a simpler one-step user experience and avoids a known filesystem problem.
Most recent is Ventoy which operates a similar ISO file boot strategy on a wider range of Linux distros and avoids a similar, known filesystem problem.

These one-step technologies has several great advantages to PUPPY users while freeing them from the need to manage extracted contents enveloped within the downloaded file.

• They will boot the distro to a desktop via nothing more than a download and boot

• The PUP-DOGs tested run EXACTLY the same in production as what you would expect from their PUP-DOG use

• Booting the distro from its ISO file yield EXACTLY the boot experience as we achieve when we extract something and call it Frugal. Thus booting the ISO file IS A FRUGAL!

• They eliminate the many issues we've seen on the forum with users wrestling with all kinds of boot related issues from device concerns to folders to boot managers to ... ELIMINATED!

• NO pre-knowledge is required to boot the PUP-DOG ISO file: Merely have one of these USB sticks.

• Many Additional PUP-DOGs can be supported in a much simpler fashion. Merely download to one of these USB sticks.

AGAIN, I DO UNDERSTAND the blogs that Barry has presented. But he focuses on an ISO9660 format that he dislikes. I do too.

BUT, these download & boot technologies experience NO SUCH PROBLEM to either Barry or any user in how it allows the PUP-DOG to boot without even that ISO9660 issue.

One more important fact of what I have presented on the forum on this: My concepts and comments have NOTHING to do with whether the container is an ISO or an IMG. My concept has always been that any one of these ISO file boot methods reduce or eliminate issues arriving from what happens after the user has downloaded the IMG/ISO file. IFF the downloaded file is bootable and discoverable by either of these 3 utilities, it boots in full glory to desktop. This is the idea that I HOPE carries thru to everyone. "That we already have a download and boot format that works with these tools. And it is hoped that as we progressed into the future, this trend of download and boot the downloaded file (ZIP/ISO/IMG) DIRECTLY TO PUP DESKTOP with NO need for user interaction with the bootable distro.

In the cases of the ISO file boot methods shown here on the forum, the METHODS discover the bootable file, list them, and boot them when a user select.

My case is NOT the file format: It is the simplicity to eliminate user issues to get to a desktop to enjoy ALL of the features of the PUP-DOG they've downloaded with no other effort except the download.

Today's PUPs and DOGs work and work well when presented by these methods. These methods release the user from any need to do anything except to boot his distro following ALL the same rules.

AND, I AM HOPEFUL that even the new approaches will be presented to allow the distro to run directly from its download, no matter, if that download is a ISO or an IMG or a ZiP or 'whatever' such that it will be discovered on the USB, presented, and boots without errors as almost all of the modern PUPs-DOGs do today. IN ESSENCE, no matter which container the bootable PUP is contained in (ZIP,SFS,ISO,IMG,etc) if would beneficial is it is discoverable and booted directly from its downloaded container.

My consensus is there is NO need to extract anything with/to/from a downloaded bootable with today's boot file technologies! NONE!

Like Barry, I invite any comments to this thread should you know of "genuine reason" that "a download and boot strategy" is a bad one for a user who wants to merely step directly into Puppyland and get involved.

My concern has always been secure, stable, ease of use!

Further, all indications seem, for now, that @dimkr is moving forward and will bring a boot directly from the downloaded bootable to the forum as well that would/could/should provide the same kind of boot experience we have today from the modern PUPs & DOGs. It may be different, but the objective to get a user immediately to desktop remains the same. Then again, maybe this notions of making it easy to boot is flawed. If so, please comment to the thread I have offered couple paragraphs up.

Thank for considering.

[bigpup]

My only possible issue about what you use ISO or Image.

The installer programs, in Puppy Linux, need to be able to use it, to do a frugal install.
They all will do frugal installs by using a ISO file.
They need to be able to do the same thing, using an image file.

About the issue of booting, by just using the image file, as it is.
Ventoy says it can do it, the same way as using an ISO.
https://www.ventoy.net/en/index.html
Ventoy is an open source tool to create bootable USB drive for ISO/WIM/IMG/VHD(x)/EFI files.
With ventoy, you don't need to format the disk over and over, you just need to copy the ISO/WIM/IMG/VHD(x)/EFI files to the USB drive and boot them directly.

So both will work in Ventoy.

Example from their tested list of OS image files:
https://www.ventoy.net/en/distro_iso/171.html
Well, look at that.
They say it works using the Easy OS img

By their list of tested operating systems.
Seems ISO file is still the most used.

Here is Openwrt releasing in .img.gz that they say will boot in Ventoy.
https://www.ventoy.net/en/distro_iso/316.html

[rockedge]

@dimkr I can get used to the.img format. Can see the advantage when using QEMU

[bigpup]

I downloaded the latest EasyOS 3.1.15.img.gz
Uncompressed it so I have the easyos 3.1.15.img

Installed Ventoy to a USB stick.
It setup the storage partition to exfat. I reformatted it to ext3.
Placed the EasyOS img on the USB.
Booted to the Ventoy menu.
Selected the EasyOS imag
Changed to the EasyOS boot menu
Selected default boot. (1st choice)

Making this post from the running Easy OS.

So yes, Ventoy can boot by just using the EasyOS image file.

[8Geee]

I might be old-fashioned, but to me an ISO seems like a 'hard-copy' of a distro. Every once in a while, when the system gets updated, remaster and make a new 'hard-copy'. That media (CD/DVD) can run as the OS if the excrement shoud strike the electric-powered oscilatory metal clover-leaf in a cage. The soft copy then can be stored in the machine also functioning as OS. Running an OS off a ISO burned CD/DVD is quite secure, I might add.

Of course the CD/DVD got removed from the lappies, you might run an OS off it and be secure. Just like that RJ45 jack went missing years back... most here know that a real router based LAN is far more secure than WiFi. Bloody Pirates they are, those Captains of Technology.

8Geee

[wiak]

I might be old-fashioned, but to me an ISO seems like a 'hard-copy' of a distro. Every once in a while, when the system gets updated, remaster and make a new 'hard-copy'. That media (CD/DVD) can run as the OS if the excrement shoud strike the electric-powered oscilatory metal clover-leaf in a cage.

Yes, indeed - though like paper can get crumpled or burned so too can an optical disc get scratched - do they degrade via other mechanisms? Main thing though is that CD/DVD drives are fading away into obscurity over time. I have one on my old machine, but truly I always never use it now. Img file certainly better long term for much of what is discussed here but until all distros have utilities for working with that (including frugal install utilities) then iso remains useful (and always will be useful for those using older distros who want to do frugal installs and so on - assuming they don't install new scripts for handling similar with img files). Yes, img files are nice for use on virtual machines.

Note that whilst some are very tired of hearing Clarity's repeated arguments re: Ventoy and SGD2 at least his argument has shown to be appropriate for img files being used with the likes of Ventoy too - so Clarity should maybe embrace img files in that sense too (which would maybe end much of the argument?).

[Clarity]

Hi @rockedge

@dimkr I can get used to the.img format. Can see the advantage when using QEMU

@dimkr does use QEMU KVM (at least that is my understanding). I have used couple of his stanzas where posted by him. In fact one of them was very helpful to me in test of UEFI. I hope he continues to supply them with his work.

In FossaPUP and Slacko (and other WoofCE PUPs) the QEMU subsystem is in the Menu.

I envision a day when all WoofCE distros include a similar Menu feature to make it easy to install and launch ISO/IMG files. Almost EVERY 64bit PC with virtualization built-in is able to comfortably run KVMs with blinding speed. I discovered this in @jamesbond's FATDOG, then reported the same in Fossa ...

I hope @Barryk sees these.

@bigpup Thanks for pointing that utility use to the community. Many others can experience the download and boot phenomena we have shown the members. I encourage all users to review the current forum threads that address the use for booting your PUP-DOG ISO files. There is useful info present to insure you have a pleasant experience as well as forum people who will aid should there be any concerns.

P.S. One can use a SG2D or a Ventoy to boot distros in a QEMU-KVM in exactly the same way its done on bare-metal.

Hope all of this info that has surfaced is useful in the efforts affront from the past WoofCE build, the new WoofCE builds, the remasters that have surfaced, the DOGs, and the several upcoming distro's technologies being currently worked on in this community.

A ton of gifted talents all over this forum's world.

[mikewalsh]

The only thing I will say here - and it's perhaps my one big 'niggle' with Clarity's whole-hearted embracing of Ventoy & SG2D - is that to me, this whole business of "ease-of-use" tends to assume that every Linux user just wants to constantly keep flitting around from distro to distro, never really "settling-down" with anything. In other words, the entire Linux 'experience' should just be one long, never-ending journey of discovery, trying out distro after distro after distro.....permanently experimenting, never giving yourself the chance to get comfortable with any of them.

I confess, I too had my distro-hopping phase (several years ago). I get the occasional urge to look at other things, but I've yet to find anything to really tempt me away from Puppy, and I always return to the sanity of the kennels, heaving a big sigh of relief....."Jeez, I'm glad that's over..!"

I can't really fault Clarity in this respect, if I'm honest. I see hundreds of veteran Linux users who even after 15/18/maybe 20 years, are STILL "distro-hopping". Some of these quite openly admit that they have no intention of ever "settling-down'", that it's the constant thrill of "the new" that keeps Linux fresh for them. Rather them than I.....

Yes, I'm a "home-body" at heart..!!

Mike.

[wiak]

I see hundreds of veteran Linux users who even after 15/18/maybe 20 years, are STILL "distro-hopping". Some of these quite openly admit that they have no intention of ever "settling-down'", that it's the constant thrill of "the new" that keeps Linux fresh for them. Rather them than I.....

I absolutely only use one distro most all of the time (that, for me, being a variant of WDL_Arch64, since I have the build plugin for re-creating that and easily incorporating new ideas onto it). Been solid for over a year on that now and fact is I can't risk too much experimenting on a distro that is used for business duties and I do not wish to be constantly maintaining any distro. Having said that, I do experiment on the side, which often involves booting up any variety of other distros - it is in that process that I discover new ideas from others, and experiment with new ideas of my own for possible later inclusion in my own WDL_Arch64 build. Main additions, however, come to me without effort from upstream Arch itself since WDL_Arch64 uses official Arch package manager 'pacman' and is fully compatible (though doesn't include much of the bloat Arch Linux official release root-filesystem since I only include what I choose) albeit driven by WDL initrd to provide the 'heart' in terms of frugal install facilities and operate in RAM save persistence modes.

One thing that Clarity would be correct about (if he realises this) is that even if the likes of Ventoy and SGD2 'can' also boot from img files, actually booting using these from either isos or img files REQUIRES the build to include support for booting from Ventoy or SGD2 - using an iso or img alone does not guarantee that in itself. WDL built distros DID NOT previously support booting from SGD2 or Ventoy at all, though can now with suitable set up (still has to be arranged by the distro iso or img file creator though - for example, SGD2 not only needs internal initrd/init support in its search code but also needs the inclusion of suitable loopback.conf file, which may or may not be just a simple copy of existing grub.conf renamed for that purpose (again depends how distro initrd/init itself is implemented); i.e. being able to boot via Ventoy or SGD2 is not guaranteed even if iso or img file is created - needs special configuration always (more than just a loopback.conf file was needed in WDL for iso boot from SGD2 so requesting that was necessary or it would never have been done by me anyway since I don't myself use that booting from SGD2 or Ventoy method).

Hopefully this discussion can be put to rest now though since I think we are all aware of the situation and most distros here support Ventoy at least (and could maybe support SGD2 with suitable loopback.conf file if distro creator so chooses).

[dimkr]

@dimkr does use QEMU KVM (at least that is my understanding).

You draw conclusions from this false statement.

There are two reasons why I mention QEMU. Forcing everyone to use Puppy only under QEMU is not one of them (and it doesn't make much sense).

First, sometimes I use QEMU to test things, because it's quicker than writing an image to a flash drive. That is also why I posted instructions how to test the new images using QEMU: I wanted to give people a quick and safe way to try them out.

Second, one of the main arguments against formats other than ISO, says that all VM solutions provide a virtual optical drive, but there are competing formats for hard drive images. If QEMU can use a raw disk image, then switching away from ISOs is not a problem for most VM use cases.

[Clarity]

As @dimkr points out, QEMU affords a method to boot an IMG or ISO container. In this post, I will use the word container as several members are turned off hearing "ISO" now. I want all to understand that I am merely referring to the container that we know and have tested using SG2D as well as Ventoy. If we can stop the fear of the word ISO and consider "container" no matter the format, "I THINK" ALL of us can move forward toward a common objective: "Making it all too easy for any user, new or old, to boot the PUP-DOG container directly to desktop!"

So I offer this for ANYONE to test (assuming you have QEMU on your system). I have @666philb FossaPUP64 running with QEMU installed.
Here's a command I use test without needing to reboot the PC with the USB stick with container files on it.

1. Download the "container" to the /BOOTISOS folder on your bootable SG2D/Ventoy USB (unmounted /dev/sdf <=== my USB)

2. Boot the virtual PC as follows from a terminal as follows:

Code: Select all

qemu-system-x86_64 -name "Boot USB stick" -enable-kvm -boot menu=off -m 2048 -smp cores=2 -vga cirrus -usb -hda /dev/sdf

In this case the "container", /dev/sdf, is the bootable USB drive.

You be the judge of this and as @dimkr and I am pointing out, its a quick way to test/run without PC booting or rebooting using "the bootable container".

Whomever might be confused on container reference, I am focused on bootable IMG/ISO/ZIP/SFS and now the bootable USB, itself.

[8Geee]

As most people don't caare about it... all of this new method of booting is a SOFTWARE solution, without HARDWARE.

I for one, will also suffer with the SOFTWARE iso, but will make a hardware copy, using that to install/boot/run. If the machine SOFTWARE copy gets borked, the HARDWARE will fix. This is the way Puppy originally was done, and I have found it as the best all-around solution. When ALL copies of the OS are software, stuff happens.

There is nothing wrong about hardware, but to some its inconvenient but more secure.

8Geee

[jfw01]

Cherry-picking some comments from various posts above:

First observation: If you were booting from this usb-stick, as a "live-cd", with a save-file on the internal drive, if you wanted to change the kernel vmlinuz, or edit the initrd, you can't, you have to rebuild the entire ISO.

First observation: Compare with the "First observation" above, analogous to booting like a "live-cd". The major difference is that the files in the boot-partition are directly editable. They are not locked away as in the case of the iso file.

It adds security to the base system as the ISO file is a non-writable format

The images produce normal, writable partitions on the flash drive, and that should be pretty much the only difference in your particular use case.

I think that there is a trade-off, around how much empty space there is in the first partition on the img.gz, so that writing is purposeful in practice, and how much larger the file is to transfer. I think that the empty space will compress well, so the trade-off is not severe in practice. Do I have the right end of the stick?

Is there a good plan for mounting a .img.gz without storing the uncompressed .img somewhere? If not then, on very constrained machines (one of my eventual targets is a 2MB macbook without an operating system) that could be an advantage for .sfs and .iso. This could be a case for uncompressed .img files, almost all of whose contents are compressed, especially in file-systems where short files are cheap, but it reactivates the trade-off around free space for writing.

My other use case is to attempt to have a trustworthy machine, by booting software that will be conspicuous to update. So, in that use-case, the non-writeable format (on optical drives, which I still have) is an advantage, as noted above.

[BarryK]

Is there a good plan for mounting a .img.gz without storing the uncompressed .img somewhere? If not then, on very constrained machines (one of my eventual targets is a 2MB macbook without an operating system) that could be an advantage for .sfs and .iso. This could be a case for uncompressed .img files, almost all of whose contents are compressed, especially in file-systems where short files are cheap, but it reactivates the trade-off around free space for writing.

The EasyOS .img file is 1.3GB uncompressed. Internally, it has two partitions, a vfat 639MB and a ext4 640MB. The files vmlinuz, easy.sfs and initrd are in the vfat partition. In the upcoming release of Easy, easy.sfs has got a bit bigger, 585MB, and the compressed .img.gz is now 616MB.

The uncompressed image file is not really a size that is going to cause problems with finding a place to keep it. But the thing is, you don't have to.

The only time that you would ever have to uncompress the .img.gz file is if you wanted to open it up, extract the vmlinuz, easy.sfs and initrd and do a direct frugal install. Afterward, you can recompress it.

And you would only ever have to do this ONCE. Unlike Puppy, Easy does not do separate installs for each new release of Puppy. You just do ONE install. After that, you can update by clicking the "update" icon on the desktop.

The "update" icon will download the latest easy*.img.gz, will uncompress the file and extract the files, then recompress it. This is all done automatically.

That one installation keeps a record of prior versions, so that you can roll back if desired. And forward. And create snapshots that you can roll back to or forward to.

So you will not have any uncompressed .img files hanging around.

[BarryK]

@jfw01 ,
It is good that you raised that point about compressed .img files, because it has got me rethinking the whole thing.

In EasyOS, at first bootup, that second ext4 partition gets expanded to fill the free space in the drive. That would normally be a usb-stick.
Note, that situation does not apply in a frugal install.

In the early days of EasyOS, the .img file did not have a second partition, only a first vfat partition. A bit later on, I decided to have a small empty ext4 2nd partition in the .img file, as it is slightly easier to resize an existing partition at first bootup than create a new one.

But, why not make that 2nd partition really small, say 8MB?

Then, compressed and uncompressed sizes of the image file are pretty much the same.

The vfat partition is pretty much chock full of files that can't be compressed any more. Well, vmlinuz and easy.sfs are already compressed. initrd is not compressed, but that is pretty small.

So, I just distribute EasyOS as uncompressed .img file, and the whole argument about the awkwardness of uncompressing goes away.

[greengeek]

Obviously a heated discussion but I will anyway speak in praise of using iso to boot from CD.

All of the people I have converted to using Puppy were converted by me offering a CD from which to boot an old laptop or desktop they had retired.

The ease of popping in a CD and having the old computer boot successfully has always been a delight - both for me and for those who suddenly experienced such a quick and easy transformation of "dead" hardware.

(These are people who would never have the ability to use a .img to attempt a boot)

But ok - time moves on and a CD is no use to a PC without an optical drive.

I shall just keep increasing my collection of laptops with inbuilt CD/DVD drives and hope I have enough of them to last me till my dying breath

[BarryK]

Obviously a heated discussion but I will anyway speak in praise of using iso to boot from CD.

All of the people I have converted to using Puppy were converted by me offering a CD from which to boot an old laptop or desktop they had retired.

The ease of popping in a CD and having the old computer boot successfully has always been a delight - both for me and for those who suddenly experienced such a quick and easy transformation of "dead" hardware.

(These are people who would never have the ability to use a .img to attempt a boot)

...err, you offer them a usb-stick instead of a CD. On most computers, except very ancient, it will bootup just as easily, and is then ready to go, no need to think about a save-file -- so in fact is simpler to use than a CD.

The only downside is you will have to give them the usb-stick, more expensive than a CD.

But if you are the person who has given them the usb-stick, you would have the knowledge to do a frugal install onto the PC hard drive, then you can take the usb-stick away.

[BarryK]

(These are people who would never have the ability to use a .img to attempt a boot)

Oh, so they would have the knowledge to burn an iso file to the CD?
If you wanted them to do that, then just tell them to use an app like Etcher to write the image file to the usb-stick.

Then choosing to boot from CD or usb-stick in the BIOS or UEFI is basically the same procedure.

I shouldn't be responding. There are a lot of posts like greengeek's, that I usually ignore.

People have their entrenched opinions, I shouldn't be arguing with them. If you are comfortable with doing things a certain way, and don't want to change, fine.

This will be my last post to this thread.

[greengeek]

you offer them a usb-stick instead of a CD.

In my experience CD booting is much more straightforward and reliable for inexperienced newbies than usb booting is.
Wasn't arguing - just don't see a reason to retire a tool that is useful.

[laxr5rs]

So, I went to the EasyOS site, and wanted to see if I could try it out on a virtual machine. I wasn't sure. But I couldn't, without buying in to the site's political and technological views on whether or not people should use the ISO format.

This typifies one of the main problems with open source software in user space. I couldn't give a rat's ass about the ISO format, as to whether or not some factions of the open source community cares whether or not the "old" ISO format is being used. I simply wanted to try out a distribution of Linux. I wasn't trying to buy into a technological and political movement. He called people names who still use the ISO format. Created straw people, so he could target them, and put them down. What the f*ck?

Let me suggest something to the open source community. The large closed source houses are huge for many reasons. One of those reasons is that they spend millions on user acceptance testing. I was at Microsoft as a contractor back in 96-97, and even then, they had professional tests going on with software and hardware with actual users. Now let me talk to you, as the open source community often talks to people who disagree with your various pet ideas. How about you wipe that little smirk off your face and come out of the woods once in a while. Cleverness isn't everything. I was there when Netscape released it's code to the wild. I was very hopeful. If open source in user space Linux operating systems success was a measure from when the Netscape code was opened, till now, it is an abject failure. It's made - no dent in user space. Open source contributions to projects like Android do not count in my statement, because projects like that, have had billions of dollars thrown at them to get them into shape - for actual users. Maybe open source developers are a little ... too proud to get down and muck around with user space interfaces and standards. Consequently, Linux will never succeed without real dollars behind it in user space, because the open source community cares more about being cool and clever than it does about the user.

Actual users. Like me. I'm a very experienced computer user. I've worked as a release engineer for almost my entire career. I've enjoyed helping developers getting their code out in an efficient and precise manner. However, I will never, ever use the Linux distribution, EasyOS, because I wanted to simply install the OS into a virtual machine if possible, and see what it was about. Instead, I was told I could not use ISO, because it's old, and etc, etc, etc. The creators of EasyOS could have given the user an option, explained why img format is better, and allowed me to chose. I had to join a technologically motivated political movement to install a damn distribution of Linux.

No way.

[mouldy]

So is there an easy way to write an img file to a bootable dvd? Then those that want to continue to boot from dvd can do so? I personally still find dvds inexpensive and convenient for video and linux installs. You can boot from a usb dvdrom if your computer doesnt have one built in. My usb dvd is just an old SATA laptop drive with a $2 converter cable to make it usb. Cheaper than buying a thumbdrive.

Is writing an img to thumbdrive a great hassle, nope. Use Etcher or such, and it pretty well does it automagically. It does want the WHOLE thumbdrive though. You kinda have to do frugal install manually if you dont want to jump hoops reclaiming space. I am becoming big fan of Limine by the way.

Mostly just hassle hunting up a thumbdrive to check available space as opposed to just grabbing a new blank 25cent dvd. As long as its a reasonably decent thumbdrive it will boot faster than a dvd. I am not that sure thumbdrives are really that great of a bang for the buck, can buy a used smallish namebrand or even new offbrand SSD and use adapter to make it usb and it will outperform all but top end thumbdrives. Course bigger to carry around if thats important to you. Nobody particularly wants the smaller capacity SSDs so they usually sell cheap used.

[rockedge]

I'm a very experienced computer user

Ya me too. I programmed diagnostic routines on the MA-1 weapon control system in Octal on toggle switches as a MA-1 weapon system control mechanic, F-106 Delta Dart, 2nd Fighter Interceptor Squadron 325th Fighter Weapons Wing, United States Air Force. Before that learned to program and system admin on PDP-11/70. Cut my teeth with assembly language on an ALTAIR 680B kit computer feeding tinybasic into it with a Teletype 33 and a paper tape reader. I learned eventually to be a sys op for IBM mainframes like the 4341. Lots of time has gone by and so have lots of operating systems, philosophy and opinions.

@laxr5rs So you come to the Puppy Linux Forum to complain about EasyOS? Huh.....Linux in general? Well congratulations on a successful career at Micro$$. Me personally don't give a rat's ass what MicroPuppet does or doesn't do. I was around when Gates was a pimply kid and remember exactly how it was.

User space? That's your problem. I make stuff and share it for FREE. I don't get paid by anybody nor does any of those contributing here. So in general I don't feel bound to satisfy any of the complaints you seem to have.

Those who want to use a group of distro's that out perform ANY of Microsoft, Google or Apple's operating systems where it counts, and do not need eye candy and hand holding, come here and use Puppy Linux, FatDog, DebianDog, KLV-Airedale, KLA. Every single one of those is in ISO form. Though being an engineer working with obviously talented developers, you did notice the extensive documentation noting that EasyOS is a totally experimental OS? Looking at your credentials I would expect there would be zero problems getting EasyOS to boot.

Why would I as the developer of KLV-Airedale who is making and sharing it for no money at all feel, the need to worry whether or not you can install any of it? I don't is the answer to that.

user space? sounds like lighting scented candles and being afraid to run as root.

[Chelsea80]

Hello all,

If I don’t want to watch a television programme or listen to a radio broadcast I change the station or switch it off.

In doing so I control my ‘user space’.

As easy as EasyOS.

Best regards (with no expletives)

Chelsea80