[Dev] new graphical liveCD ISO

Josh Branning lovell.joshyyy at gmail.com
Thu Jul 6 16:45:59 GMT 2017

On 06/07/17 17:12, bill-auger wrote:
 > ok cool i thought and openrc ISO would be interesting to ppl - as i
 > said though, the openrc ISO is not working yet but i will keep you
 > guys posted
 > i chose LXDE mostly because it is easy to configure using flat-files
 > and all - because i wanted it to be easy to boot the CD and make
 > customiztions (like the theme) and then easily transfer those change
 > back outside into the build tree - many people do not care for LXDE
 > but that is not important - i am working to streamline the entire
 > process so that many WM/DE combinations are available - LXDE for now
 > is a good compromise on simplicity and feature set while developing -
 > it sertainly does not need to be "The" parabola desktop
 >> I am not 100% sure about the installer. Can the ISO be built
 >> without?

Again, I think these are/were excellent choices. I like LXDE 'coz it's 
mostly C and I like OpenRC, because of it's cross platform advantages 
to/for other OSes as well as Parabola such as BSD and also it's 
compatibility with System V scripts.

OpenRC is also written in C and sh, which are generally portable and 
appear on most systems (common), but are also better for bootstrapping 
from non-gcc C-only compilers, if one were to appear that could compile 
the linux kernel (it could reduce the trusting trust problem).

Perhaps these weren't the reasons you had in mind, I don't know, but you 
seem to have made good choices as far as things go.

 > i am not clear what you are asking here - as i said, currently i did
 > not yet put the calamares on the CD - so it is not only possible, but
 > that is indeed how the current demo is at this moment - the calamares
 > installer is going to be just another package so can be easily
 > installed or not - that is actually the reson i did not put it in -
 > because i would like to get that package into the repos first - but
 > without and installer you only have a liveCD environment with no
 > persistence - i dont see how it would make any difference if the
 > installer were left out - one does not need to run the installer just
 > because it is there - maybe i am mis-understanding the question

Ok, great.

The reason for asking whether the ISO could be created without the 
installer was because I am not to keen on CMake and C++. I think 
everything where possible should be written in C (only half jokingly) 
and I prefer shell and GNU Makefiles. But that's only my personal 

What I am using to install at the moment is a script I modified and 
found on the interwebs, in combination with the CLI iso.

I may send it to you, although I don't know the licence. You could 
probably search for the text online if you cared or if it was important 

... let me find that USB drive,


More information about the Dev mailing list